k  ;  *  T  K  K93JP4«t^«I  f '^  T 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2008  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/englisliliistoryofOOIounricli 


HANDBOOKS  for  Students  and  General  Readers, 


HISTORY 


ENGLISH    LANGUAGE 


T.  R.  LOUNSBURY 

PROFESSOR   OF   ENGLISH   IN   THE   SHEFFIELD   SCIENTIFIC 
.OF  VALE  COLLEGE. 

UNIVBESITy 

'-    ■.■•V 


NEW  YORK 
HENRY  HOLT  AND   COMPANY 

1883 


iit 


L- 


ii'f 


Copyright, 
By  henry  holt  &  CO., 
1879. 
-2.  Y  3^  ^ 


PREFACE. 


The  general  plan  of  this  volume  is  so  fully  stated  in 
the  conclusion  of  the  introductory  chapter,  that  little 
needs  to  be  said  in  addition.  One  o/  "-.wo  explanatory 
statements  it  may  be  advisable  to  make. 

The  histor}^  is  a  history  of  the  language,  and  not  at 
all  of  the  literature.  To  any  real  comprehension  of 
the  former,  however,  some  knowledge  of  tlie  latter  is 
essential;  and  inasmuch  as,  in  the  case  of  Anglo- 
Saxon  and  Early  English,  sources  of  information  on 
this  subject  are  not  easily  accessible  to  most  readers, 
a  slight  sketch  of  the  literature  of  those  periods  has 
been  given. 

The  division  of  the  history  into  two  parts,  each  to 
a  certain  extent  complete  in  itself,  has  involved  in  a 
few  instances  the  'necessity  of  going  over  the  same 
ground.     In  no  case,  however,  will  this  be  found  to 


vi  Preface. 

be  mere  repetition.  And,  while  the  second  part  has 
been  more  particularly  prepared  for  the  special  stu- 
dent, it  is  hoped  that  there  is  nothing  in  it  which  will 
present  any  difficulty  to  any  reader  of  ordinary  intelli- 
gence who  cares  to  investigate  the  subject. 


EXPLANATORY. 


This  Series  is  intended  to  meet  the  requirement  of 
brief  text-books  both  for  schools  and  for  adult  readers 
who  wish  to  review  or  expand  their  knowledge. 

The  grade  of  the  books  is  intermediate  between  the 
so-called  "primers"  and  the  larger  works  professing 
to  present  quite  detailed  views  of  the  respective  sub- 
jects. 

Such  a  notion  as  a  person  beyond  childhood  re- 
quires of  some  subjects,  it  is  difficult  and  perhaps 
impossible  to  convey  in  one  such  volume.  Therefore, 
occasionally  a  volume  is  given  to  each  of  the  main 
departments  into  which  a  subject  naturally  falls— for 
instance,  a  volume  to  the  Zoology  of  the  vertebrates, 
and  one  to  that  of  the  invertebrates.  While  this  ar- 
rangement supplies  a  compendious  treatment  for  those 
who  wish,  it  will  also  sometimes  enable  the  reader 
interested  in  only  a  portion  of  the  field  covered  by  a 
science,  to  study  the  part  he  is  interested  in,  without 
getting  a  book  covering  the  whole. 

Care  is  taken  to  bring  out  whatever  educational 
value  may  be  extracted  from  each  subject  without  im- 


vi  Explanatory. 

peding  the  exposition  of  it.  In  the  books  on  the 
sciences,  not  only  are  acquired  results  stated,  but  as 
full  explanation  as  possible  is  given  of  the  methods  of 
inquiry  and  reasoning  by  which  these  results  have 
been  obtained.  Consequently,  although  the  treatment 
of  each  subject  is  strictly  elementary,  the  fundamental 
facts  are  stated  and  discussed  with  the  fulness  needed 
to  place  their  scientific  significance  in  a  clear  light, 
and  to  show  the  relation  in  which  they  stand  to  the 
general  conclusions  of  science. 

Care  is  also  taken  that  each  book  admitted  to  the 
series  shall  either  be  the  work  of  a  recognized  author- 
ity, or  bear  the  unqualified  ap[)roval  of  such.  As  far 
as  practicable,  authors  are  selected  who  combine 
knowledge  of  their  subjects  with  experience  m  ceach- 
ing  them. 


CONTENTS.  ^ 


INTRODUCTORY  CHAPTER. 

LANGUAGES  ALLIED  TO  THE  ENGLISH. 

I.  The  Indian.  —  II.  The  Iranian.  —  III.  The  Hellenic  — 
IV.  The  Slavonic,  or  Slavo-Lettic.  — V.  The  Celtic. — 
VI.  The  Italic  — VII.  The  Teutonic    .        .        ."      .      i 


PART   I. 
GENERAL  HISTORY. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  ROMAN  AND  THE  TEUTONIC  CONQUESTS  OF  BRITAIN. 

The  Roman  Conquest.  —  The  Teutonic  Conquest.  —  Names 
of  the  Teutonic  Invading  Tribes,  and  Kingdoms  found- 
ed by  them.  —  Rise  of  the  Kingdom  of  Wessex     .        ,    13 


viii  Contents. 

CHAPTER  II. 

THE  ANGLO-SAXON   LANGUAGE  AND  LITERATURE. 

Language  of  the  Teutonic  Invaders.  —  Differences  between 
Anglo-Saxon  and  Modern  English. — Anglo-Saxon  Lit- 
erature.—  Poetry. —  Prose 21 

CHAPTER  in. 

INFLUENCE    OF    FOREIGN    TONGUES    UPON    THE    ENGLISH    OF 
THE  ANGLO-SAXON   PERIOD. 

Celtic.  —  Latin.  —  Scandinavian 29 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  NORMAN  CONQUEST  AND  THE  FRENCH  LANGUAGE  IN 
ENGLAND. 

The  Norman-French.  —  The  Norman  Conquest.  —  Effect 
of  the  Conquest  upon  the  Native  Language.  —  French 
and  English  Languages  on  English  Soil.  —  Rise  in  Im- 
portance of  the  English.  —  Rise  of  Modern  English  Lit- 
erature.—  Debasement  of  Anglo-Norman  French. — 
General  Adoption  of  English  by  all  Classes  .        .        .39 


CHAPTER  V. 

PERIODS  IN   HISTORY  OF   THE  ENGLISH  LANGUAGE,  AND  THE 
CHANGES   WROUGHT   IN    IT   BY  THE   NORMAN    CONQUEST. 

The  Language  before  the  Conquest.  —  The  Language  after 
the  Conquest.  —  Periods  of  the  English  Language. — 
Literature  of  the  Early  English  period.  —  Changes  in 
Grammar  between  Anglo  Saxon  and  Middle  English. — 
Changes  in  Vocabulary.  —  Losses  of  Middle  English  as 
compared  with  Anglo-Saxon 66 


Contents.  ix 

CHAPTER  VI. 

THE    THREE    DIALECTS    OF    EARLY    ENGLISH,  AND    THE    RISK 
OF  THE  MIDLAND. 

The  Three  Early  English  Dialects.  —  Geographical  Limits 
of  the  Three  Dialects.  —  The  Scotch  Dialect         .        .    90 

CHAPTER  Vn. 

CHANGES  IN  THE  MIDDLE  ENGLISH  PERIOD  (135O-1550). 

Declension  of  Nouns.  —  Declension  of  the  Third  Personal 
Pronoun.  —  Inflection  of  the  Verb  .        .        .        .  1 10 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

MODERN  ENGLISH. 

Inflection  of  the  Pronoun.  —  Inflection  of  the  Verb.  —  Set- 
tlement of  the  Orthography.  —  Wide  Extension  of  Eng- 
lish   126 


PART   II. 
HISTORY  OF  INFLECTIONS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

SOME  FEATURES  COMMON  TO  ALL  THE  TEUTONIC  TONGUES^. 

Case.  —  Number.  —  Declension.  —  Vowel  Declension  in  a  ; 
in./;  in  u.  —  Consonant  Declension. —  Rhotacism. — 
Vowel- Variation.  —  Vowel-Change.  —  Vowel-Modifica- 
tion .        .*       .        .        .        .     *  .        .        .      '  .        .151 


X  Contents, 

CHAPTER  II. 

THE  NOUN. 

I.  Vowel  Declension.  —  II.  Consonant  Declension     .        ,  168 
CHAPTER  III. 

THE  ADJECTIVE. 

Indefinite  (Pronominal  or  Strong)  Declension.  —  Definite 
(Nominal  or  Weak)  Declension.  —  Comparison     .  195 

CHAPTER   IV. 

THE  PRONOUN. 

The  Demonstrative  Pronouns.  —  The  Personal  Pronouns. 

—  The  Interrogative   Pronouns.  —  The   Relative  Pro- 
nouns        207 

CHAPTER  V. 

THE  VERB. 

T^Q.  Teutonic  Verb.  —  General  Statements.  — Conflict  of 
the  Strong  and  Weak  Conjugations.  —  The  English 
Strong  Conjugation.  —  The  Past  Participle  of  the 
Strong  Conjugation.  —  The  Weak  Conjugation.  —  Past 
Participle  of  the  Weak  Conjugation.  —  Number  and 
■  Person.  —  Tenses  of  the  Verb.  —  The  Present  Tense, 
Indicative  and  Subjunctive.  —  The  Preterite  Indicative 
and  Subjunctive.  —  The  Future  Tense.  —  Future-perfect 
Tense.  —  The  Perfect  and  Pluperfect.  —  The  Impera- 
tive. —  The  Infinitive  and  Participles.  —  Passive  Forma- 
tions. —  Prelerite-present  Verbs.  —  Cunnan.  —  Durran. 

—  Sculan.  —  Magan.  —  Motan.  —  Agan.  —  Witan.  — 
Willan.  —  Irregular  Verbs 238 

Index  of  Words  and  Phrases 357 


UNIVEESITY 
ENGLISH   LANGUAGE, 


INTRODUCTORY  CHAPTER. 

LANGUAGES  ALLIED   TO   THE  ENGLISH. 

The  most  superficial  student  of  speech  is  well 
acquainted  with  the  fact  that  English  is  no  isolated, 
independent  tongue,  but  one  of  the  members  of  a 
vast  family,  embracing  tongues  far  removed  from  one 
another,  both  in  time  and  in  space.  This  family  occu- 
pied, at  an  early  period,  large  districts  of  Asia,  and 
nearly  the  whole  of  Europe ;  and  during  the  last  four 
hundred  years  its  domain  has  been  extended  still 
farther,  over  a  great  portion  of  the  habitable  globe. 
Various  names  have  been  employed  to  designate  it 
as  a  whole ;  of  which  those  most  in  use  are  Indo- 
Germanic,  Indo-European,  and  Aryan,  especially  the 
last  two.  Every  one  of  the  Indo-European  lan- 
guages is  more  or  less  closely  related  to  every  other 
by  the  fact  of  descent  from  a  common  mother- 
tongue.     Yet  of  this  common  mother-tongue  not  only 


2  English  Language. 

have  no  monuments  been  handed  down,  but  also  the 
time  when  and  the  place  where  it  was  spoken  are 
unknown,  and  are  likely  to  remain  forever  unknown. 
This  only  we  can  say,  that,  at  some  remote  periods  of 
the  past,  members  of  the  race  that  spoke  the  primitive 
Indo-European  speech  or  later  descendants  of  it, 
parted  company  from  one  another,  wandered  in  vari- 
ous directions,  and  finally  formed  permanent  settle- 
ments far  apart.  Lapse  of  time,  and  separation  in 
space,  caused  differences  to  spring  up  between  these 
dispersed  communities,  —  differences  in  customs,  in 
beliefs,  and,  what  most  concerns  us  here,  in  language. 
The  divergences  that  arose  became,  in  the  course 
i;f  events,  so  much  more  important  and  conspicuous 
than  the  resemblances  which  had  been  preserved,  that, 
when  the  scattered  races  and  peoples  that  had  sprung 
from  this  one  primitive  Indo-European  tribe  appear 
to  us  in  recorded  history,  they  are  totally  unaware  of  the 
tie  of  blood  or  of  speech  that  subsists  between  them  ; 
in  fact,  it  was  not  discovered  until  within  a  hundred 
years.  The  scientific  study  which  has  been  carried 
on  in  the  present  century  of  the  languages  of  the  Indo- 
European  family  shows  that  in  all  branches  of  it  there 
is  a  certain  number  pf  the  same  grammatical  forms 
and  of  the  same  words.  These  are  not  merely  proofs 
of  a  common  descent :  their  common  existence  makes 
it  clear  that  these  forms  and  words  must  have  belonged 
to  the  speech  of  the  primitive  Indo-European  commu- 
nity before  its  dispersion  into  separate  ones ;  and  from 
it  they  must  have  been  transmitted  to  all  its  descend- 


Languages  allied  to  the  English.  3 

ants.     By  a  comparison  of  the  forms  and  words  thug 

preserved  in  the  derived  languages,  it  has  been  possi- 
ble to  construct  a  theoretical  primitive  language,  which 
is  the  remote  parent  of  every  tongue  included  in  this 
family. 

Bound  to  each  other,  therefore,  by  the  fact  of  com- 
mon descent,  all  Indo-European  tongues  necessarily 
are ;  but  it  likewise  follows  that  some  are  much  more 
closely  related  to  one  another  than  they  are  to  others. 
According  to  the  nearness  of  this  relationship  among 
themselves,  the  languages  of  the  Indo-European 
stock  have  been  divided  into  the  following  distinct 
branches :  — 

I.  The  Indian.  —  This  embraces  the  languages 
of  Northern  Hindostan.  Its  great  representative  is 
the  Sanskrit,  which,  as  a  spoken  tongue,  died  out  three 
centuries  before  Christ.  It  is  the  oldest  of  all  the  lan- 
guages of  the  Indo-European  family,  and  as  a  whole 
comes  nearest  to  the  primitive  speech. 

II.  The  Iranian. — This  includes  the  languages 
of  both  Ancient  and  Modern  Persia  and  of  provinces 
and  tribes  adjoining  or  belonging  to  that  country. 

III.  The  Hellenic. — This  includes  the  Ancient 
Greek,  with  its  various  dialects,  and  its  existing  repre- 
sentative, the  Romaic  or  Modern  Greek. 

IV.  The  Slavonic,  or  Slavo-Lettic— This  in- 
cludes the  languages  spoken  over  a  large  portion  of 
Eastern  Europe.  Of  this  branch  the  Russian  is  much 
the  most  important. 

With  none  of  these  has  the  English  any  intimate 


4  English  Language. 

relationship,  though  from  the  Ancient  Greek  it  has 
borrowed  a  moderately  large  numbei  of  words.  V.'ith 
the  three  remaining  branches  its  connections  are  nearer, 
though  varying  in  their  nature.  Witli  the  first  it  has 
come  into  close  geographical  contact ;  from  the  sec- 
ond it  has  taken  full  half  of  its  literary  vocabulary  ;  of 
the  third  it  is  itself  a  member. 

V.  The  Celtic.  —  This  branch  was  once  widely 
spread  over  Western  Europe ;  but  it  is  now  confined 
to  portions  of  the  British  Isles,  and,  in  North-western 
France,  to  the  Peninsula  of  Britanny,  a  part  of  the 
ancient  Armorica.  It  is  divided  into  the  two  follow- 
ing clearly-defined  groups  :  ist.  The  Cymric.  To  this 
belong  the  languages  or  dialects  once  used  through- 
out the  whole  of  England  and  Southern  Scotland,  but 
now  limited  to  the  principality  of  Wales,  and  repre- 
sented in  it  by  the  tongue  we  call  the  Welsh.  The 
Cornish,  the  language  of  the  extreme  south-west  of 
Britain,  which  died  out  entirely  in  the  last  century,  was 
also  a  member  of  this  group,  which  includes  one  other 
living  tongue  besides  the  Welsh,  —  the  Breton  or  Ar- 
morican,  spoken  in  the  Peninsula  of  Britanny,  as 
already  mentioned.  2d,  The  Gadhelic  or  Gaelic.  Of 
this  group  the  most  important  members  are  the  Irish, 
the  native  language  of  Ireland,  and  the  Erse,  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Scottish  Highlands.  The  Manx,  spoken 
by  a  portion  of  the  population  of  the  Isle  of  Man,  is 
also  included  in  it.  The  Celtic  tongues  are  all  grad- 
ually dying  out ;  giving  way  in  the  British  Isles  to  the 
encroachment  of  the  English,  and  in  France  to  tha^ 


Languages  allied  to  the  English,  5 

of  the  French.  Linguistically  they  are  widely  removed 
from  our  tongue,  and,  in  spite  of  their  geographical 
nearness,  have  had  no  influence  worth  speaking  of  on 
its  vocabulary,  and  none  at  all  on  its  grammar. 

VI.  The  Italic.  —  Of  the  ancient  languages  in- 
cluded in  this  branch,  the  Latin  is  the  great  represen- 
tative ;  and  from  that  tongue  have  descended  all  the 
modern  ones  belonging  to  it.  These  are  collectively 
called  Romanic  or  Romance.  The  most  important 
of  the  descendants  of  the  Latin  are  the  Italian,  the 
Spanish,  the  Portuguese,  the  French,  and  the  Proven- 
Qal.  French  was  at  first  the  language  of  Northern 
France  only ;  while  Provengal,  or  the  Languedoc,  wa.s 
the  language  of  the  south  of  that  country.  The 
latter,  during  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries 
especially,  flourished  as  a  language  of- literature,  and 
in  it  was  then  composed  the  poetry  of  the  trouba- 
dours. But  the  political  preponderance  of  Northern 
France  carried  with  it  the  supremacy  of  the  tongue 
spoken  in  it ;  and  the  Provengal  sunk  from  the  position 
of  a  cultivated  language  to  that  of  a  dialect.  The  in- 
fluence of  this  branch  upon  the  English  has  been  very 
great  so  far  as  regards  its  vocabulary.  The  Latin  and 
Romance  elements  in  our  tongue,  owing  to  circum- 
stances connected  with  its  history,  make  up  fully  one- 
half  of  the  number  of  words  used  in  literature. 

VII.  The  Teutonic. — Of  this  branch  English 
is  one  of  the  most  important  members,  and  may, 
perhaps,  be  justly  called  the  most  important,  As  we 
have  no  remains  of  the  primitive  Indo-European,  so 


6  English  Laiiguage, 

we  have  none  of  the  primitive  Teutonic  speech,  from 
which  all  the  tongues  belonging  to  this  stock  have 
descended.  This  whole  branch  is  subdivided  into  four 
groups : — 

^  I.  The  Gothic,  or  Mceso -Gothic.  —  This  was  the 
tongue  spoken  by  the  Goths  who  dwelt  in  Moesia, 
on  the  Lower  Danube.  It  is  the  eldest  of  the  Teu- 
tonic tongues  that  have  been  preserved,  and  naturally 
much  the  most  ancient  in  its  forms  ;  standing,  indeed, 
in  the  same  relation  to  the  other  members  of  this 
branch  that  the  Sanskrit  does  to  all  the  members  of 
the  Indo-European  family.  Its  principal  literary 
monument  is  only  partially  preserved.  This  was  a 
translation  of  the  Bible  made  in  the  fourth  century 
into  the  language  of  the  Goths  dwelling  in  the  prov- 
ince of  Moesia  on  the  Lower  Danube,  by  Ulfilas,  their 
bishop.  The  speech  died  out  in  the  ninth  century, 
and  has  left  no  descendants. 

2.  The  Norse,  or  Scandinavian. — The  oldest  repre- 
sentative of  this  group  is  the  Qld  Norse,  or,  as  it  is 
sometimes  called,  the  Old  Icelandic.  To  Iceland  it 
was  carried  in  the  ninth  century  by  settlers  from  Nor- 
way, and  there  gave  birth  to  a  brilliant  literature.  The 
modern  Scandinavian  tongues  are  the  Icelandic,  the 
Swedish,  the  Danish,  and  the  Norwegian.  The  last  is 
a  popular  dialect  only. 

3.  The  High- Germanic.  —  This  is  so  called  because 
originally  spoken  in  Upper  or  Higher  Germany.  The 
history  of  the  dialects  belonging  to  it  is  divided  into 
three  periods.    The  first  is  that  of  the  Old  High  Ger- 


Languages  allied  to  the  English.  7 

man,  extending  from  the  eighth  to  the  twelfth  cerrury. 
The  leading  literary  dialect  of  the  Old  High  German 
was  the  Frankish,  though  others  were  employed.  The 
second  period  was  that  of  Middle  High  German,  ex- 
tending from  the  twelfth  to  the  sixteenth  century. 
This  literature  was  very  abundant  in  quantity,  and  rich 
in  quality  :  the  dialect  in  which  it  was  written  was  the 
Swabian.  The  New  High  German  begins  with  the 
writings  of  the  reformer  Luther,  in  the  first  half  of 
the  sixteenth  century,  especially  with  his  translation 
of  the  Bible.  It  is  the  language  of  all  modern  Ger- 
man literature,  and  is  by  us  usually  termed  simply  the 
German. 

4.  The  Low  Germanic.  —  This  wa^  so  called  be- 
cause originally  spoken  in  Northern  or  Low  Germany. 
This  group  consists  of  several  tongues,  of  which  some 
are  now  only  popular  dialects,  having  been  reduced  to 
this  condition  by  the  predominance  of  High  German  as 
the  language  of  Hterature.  The  four  ancient  tongues 
of  this  group  are  the  Friesic,  the  Netherlandish,  the 
Old  Saxon,  and  the  Saxon  or  English.  The  Friesic 
was  once  spoken  on  the  coasts  of  the  North  Sea  and  on 
the  adjoining  islands.  Its  oldest  records  consist  of 
legal  documents  of  about  the  thirteenth  century,  and 
it  is  now  only  an  idiom  of  the  common  people.  The 
Netherlandish  and  the  Old  Saxon  were  closely  related. 
From  them  have  descended  the  Dutch  of  Holland, 
the  Flemish  of  portions  of  Belgium,  and  the  Piatt 
Deutsch,  or  Low  German  proper.  This  last  is  still  a 
wide-spread  popular  idiom  in  Northern  Germany,  and 


8  English  Laiiguage, 

is  occasionally  employed  in  literature.  Last  and  most 
important  of  this  group  is  the  Saxon,  or  English,  car- 
ried in  the  fifth  and  sixth  centuries  to  Great  Britain  by 
the  Saxons  and  Angles,  and  there  having  a  history,  and 
developing  a  literature  peculiarly  its  own.  The  earliest 
form  of ^  it  is  commonly  designated  by  modern  writers 
as  Anglo-Saxon. 

While  English  is,  therefore,  spoken  of  with  sufficient 
accuracy  as  a  member  of  the  Indo-European  family 
of  languages,  it  is  more  specifically  to  be  described  as 
a  member  of  the  Low  Germanic  group  of  the  Teutonic 
branch  of  that  family.  Its  history,  like  that  of  all 
other  tongues,  naturally  divides  itself  into  two  parts. 
The  first  embraces  what,  for  lack  of  a  better  term,  may 
be  called  its  general  history ;  that  is,  the  account  of 
the  circumstances  and  conditions  under  which  it  de- 
veloped  its  present  form,  of  the  external  agencies  that 
operated  upon  it,  especially  the  social  and  political  in- 
fluences that  affected  it,  that  modified  it,  and,  in  particu- 
lar, that  changed  the  character  of  its  vocabulary,  and 
transformed  it  from  an  inflectional  speech  into  ong 
nearly  non-inflectional.  The  second  is  the  history  of 
the  internal  changes  which  took  place  within  the  lan- 
guage itself.  It  is  obvious  at  a  glance  that  tl;ie  latter  is 
a  far  more  intricate  and  extensive  subject  than  the 
former.  It  embraces,  indeed,  a  vast  variety  of  subjects, 
the  full  consideration  of  any  one  of  which  would  require 
a  separate  volume.  This  work  will  treat  of  so  much 
only  of  this  internal  history  as  is  concerned  with  the 
valuations  of  form  that  have  taken  place  in  the  noun. 


Langtiages  allied  to  the  English.  9 

the  adjective,  the  pronoun,  and  the  verb,  caused  by 
change  or  loss  of  inflection.  Some  notice  will  neces- 
sarily be  taken,  in  addition,  of  the  steps  which  the  lan- 
guage has  resorted  to  in  order  to  increase  its  resources, 
and  to  repair  the  losses  it  has  sustained,  either  by  the 
development  of  forms  entirely  new,  or  the  application 
of  old  forms  to  new  uses.  This  is  but  a  small  por- 
tion of  the  immense  field  which  must  be  covered  in 
any  full  account  of  the  interior  growth  and  develop- 
ment of  our  speech ;  but  beyond  these  limits  there 
will,  in  this  treatise,  be  no  attempt  to  go. 


/ 


PART    I. 
GENERAL  HISTORY. 


univehsity 

CHAPTER   I. 

THE   ROMAN  AND   THE   TEUTONIC    CONQUESTS 
OF  BRITAIN. 

The  English  tongue  is  at  the  present  time  the 
speech  of  communities  scattered  over  all  the  globe ; 
but  its  history  as  a  language  is  almost  wholly  confined 
to  the  Island  of  Great  Britain.  There  it  was  that  the 
violent  changes  which  took  place  in  the  social  and 
political  condition  of  the  people  were  indirectfy  fol- 
lowed by  as  violent  changes  in  the  character  and 
grammatical  structure  of  the  words  they  spoke.  With- 
out an  adequate  knowledge  of  the  former,  no  one  can 
gain  a  satisfactory  conception  of  the  latter.  The 
Cells,  the  Romans,  the  Saxons,  the  Northmen,  and  the 
French  have  met  or  succeeded  one  another  upon 
British  soil ;  and  the  occupation  of  the  country  by 
each  has  left  ineffaceable  records  of  itself  in  the 
tongue  we  use  to-day.  k  But  English  was  not  the  origi- 
nal speech  of  the  island.  In  the  modern  form  in 
which  we  know  it,  it  can,  indeed,  hardly  lay  claim  to  a 
higher  age  than  five  hundred  years.     It  is,  therefore, 

13 


14  English  Language, 

quite  as  important  to  undei  stand  clearly  what  English 
is  not,  as  well  as  what  it  is. 

The  Roman  Conquest.  —  Great  Britain  can 
hardly  be  said  to  be  known  to  history  until  a  short 
time  before  the  Christian  era.  Our  first  positive  infor- 
mation in  regard  to  it  we  owe  to  Julius^  Caesar,  who, 
after  his  conquest  of  Gaul,  turned  his  attentjun  to  the 
island,  and  twice  invaded  it,  —  once  in  55  B.C.,  and 
again  in  the  following  year.  He  found  tllEre^tTpeople 
alHed  in  blood  and  speech  to  the  one  he  had  just 
brought  under  Roman  sway,  and  both  belonging  to 
the  race  called  Celtic,  then  widely  spread  over  Wes- 
tern Europe.  It  was  the  Cymric  branch  of  this 
family,  now  represented  in  Great  Britain  by  the  Welsh, 
that  had  possession  of  most  of  the  island ;  and  it  was 
with  this  that  Caesar  came  into  contact.  His  success 
was  rather  nominal  than  real ;  for  though  he  marched 
a  little  way  into  the  interior,  and  exacted  the  payment 
of  a  tribute,  he  seems,  in  the  words  of  Tacitus,  to  have 
handed  down  to  posterity  the  discovery  of  the  coun- 
try rather  than  its  possession.  For  nearly  a  hundred 
years  afterward  it  remained  unmolested  by  the  Ro- 
mans. But  in  the  reign  of  the  Emperor  Claudian  a 
renewed  attempt  at  conquest  began,  in  A.D.  42,  and 
was  kept  up  without"  intermission  till  near  the-elose  of 
the  first  century.  By  that  time  the  reduction  of  the 
island  was  accomplished  as  far  north  as  the  Forth. 
Beyond  that  the  invaders  never  gained  any  thing  but 
a  temporary  foothold. 

With  the  conquest  of  the  greater  portion  of  the 


Roman  and  Teutonic  Conquests.  i^ 

island  the  Romans  began  that  energetic  administra- 
tion, which,  in  the  case  of  Gaul  and  Spain,  ended  in 
making  the  native  inhabitants  of  those  countries  as 
Latin  as  the  inhabitants  of  Italy  itself.  Colonies  were 
estabhshed,  towns  were  fortified,  military  roads  were 
constructed.  With  their  laws  and  customs,  the  invad- 
ers introduced  also  their  language  and  literature. 
These  last  early  became  popular ;  and  the  attention 
paid  to  them  must  have  steadily  increased  during  the 
more  than  three  hundred  years  in  which  the  Romans 
occupied  the  island.  Yet,  however  widely  the  Latin 
tongue  was  then  used,  it  manifestly  never  made  its 
way  in  Britain  as  it  did  in  Gaul  and  Spain.  It  was 
without  doubt  chiefly  confined  to  the  educated  classes 
and  to  the  dwellers  in  cities ;  for,  with  the  witjidrawal 
of  the  Romans  in  the  early  part  of  the,-.fjfth  century, 
their  language  disappeared  almost  as  completely. 
Some  of  its  words  were  retained  in  the  speech  of  the 
native  population,  and  have  been  handed  down  in  the 
speech  of  their  descendants  ;  but  perhaps  not  a  single 
one  of  these  has  passed  directly  from  this  source  over 
into  the  English  tonguej  Traces  of  the  Roman  occu- 
pation are,  indeed,  to  be  foiind  in  names  of  towns. 
The  Latin  colonia,  'colony,'  is  seen  in  the  final  syllable 
of  Lincoln ;  the  Latin  castra,  '■  camp,'  is  preserved  in 
the  names  of  a  large  number  of  places  ending  in 
rcaster^  -cester,  and  -Chester,  as  Lancaster,  Worcester, 
and  Winchester.  Likewise  the  word  'street,'  which 
is  nothing  more  than  the  first  word  of  strata  via, 
*  paved  way,'  may  have  come  to  us  in  consequence 


1 6  English  Language. 

of  the  Teutonic  invaders  hearing  the  term  first  applied 
by  the  Britons  to  the  Roman  mihtary  roads ;  but  this 
is  doubtful,  for  the  same  term  appears  very  early  in 
all  the  Teutonic  dialects.     It  is  possible  that  one  or 
two  other  words  may  have  been  derived  in  this  way 
from  this  source ;  but  it  is  evident  that  the  Latin  of 
■  the  Roman  occupation  exercised  no  appreciable  influ- 
ence  upon  the   English   speech  properly  so   called. 
'  Still,  as  the  Roman  names  of  towns  have  been  retained 
^  to  this  day,  to  the  words  denoting  these  is  often  given 
\  the  title  of  "  Latin  of  the  First  Period."  i 

The  Teutonic  Conquest.  —  Up  to  this  time, 
English  was  not  known  in  the  island.  It  was  to  the 
Teutonic  invasion,  that  followed  soon  after  the  Roman 
occupation  ceased,  that  we  owe  the  introduction  of 
our  language  into  Great  Britain,  and  the  gradual  dis- 
placement of  the  Celtic  tongues. 

The  story  of  this  Teutonic  invasion  and  conquest  is 
in  many  respects  obscure  and  uncertain ;  but,  while 
numerous  details  may  be  mythical  rather  than  his- 
torical, the  general  statement  cannot  be  far  from  the 
truth.  The  common  account  runs  somewhat  as  fol- 
lows :  Of  the  western  provinces  of  the  Roman  Empire, 
Great  Britain  was  the  last  to  be  conquered,  the  first  to 
be  abandoned.  Its  inhabitants  were  left,  in  the  first 
half  of  the  fifth  century,  exposed  to  the  attacks  of  the 
dwellers  in  the  northern  part  of  the  island,  the  Picts 
and  Scots,  who  had  never  been  really  subdued,  and 
whose  incursions  had  always  been,  from  the  time  of  the 
first  conquest,  a  source  of  annoyance  and  alarm.     In  T 


Roina7t  and  Teutonic  Conquests.  17 

their  extremity  the  wretched  population  called  for 
aid  upon  certain  Teutonic  tribes  dwelling  upon  the 
north  coast  of  Germany.  It  was  by  these  the  English 
language  was  brought  into  Great  Britain;  for  the 
new  auxiliaries  did  not  long  remain  contented  with 
the  hmited  territory  which  had  been  assigned  them, 
but,  soon  turning  their  arms  against  their  allies,  ended 
at  last  in  conquering  the  country  they  came  to  save. 
This  invasion  is  said  to  have  begun  about  the  middle 
xy  of  the  fiftlx^ntury.  It  is  more  than  probable,  to  be 
S^  sure,  that,  previous  to  this  time,  Teutonic  bands  had 
made  marauding  descents  upon  the  coast :  it  is  not 
impossible  that  they  had  formed  scattered  settlements. 
About  the  end  of  the  fourth  century  one  of  the  Ro- 
man military  officers  stationed  in  Britain  was  styled 
"  Count  of  the  Saxon  frontier"  (^Comes  Limitis  Saxo- 
nici  per  Britanniani)  ;  and  his  jurisdiction  extended 
from  the  Wash  to  Southampton.  This  stretch  of  coast 
may  have  been  called  the  Saxon  frontier  because  Sax- 
ons inhabited  it :  there  is  little  doubt  it  was  so  called 
because  the  Saxons  molested  it. 

Names  of  the  Teutonic  Invading  Tribes, 
and  Kingdoms  founded  by  them. — The  Teu- 
tonic invaders  were  Low  Germans,  and  belonged  to 
three  tribes,  —  the  Jutes,  the  Saxons,  and  the  Angles. 
According  to  the  dates  furnished  by  the  Anglo-Saxon 
chronicle,  Hengist  and  Horsa  came  over  in  449  with 
a  body  of  Jutes,'~ahd  subsequently  founded  tlielcing- 
dom  of  Kent.  In  477  ^lla  landed  near  the  present 
city  of  oTichester,  and  founded  the  kingdom  of  the 


1 8  English  Language, 

South  Saxons,  or  Sussex.  In  495  Cerdic  came  overj 
and  in  519  founded'tlie  kingdom  of  the  West  Saxons, 
or  Wessex,  which  by  successive  conquests  came  finally 
to  include  nearly  all  South-west  England,  with  a  portion 
of  the  country  north  of  the  Thames.  There  was  also 
one  other  Saxon  kingdom,  that  of  the  East  Saxons,  or 
Essex,  which  seems  to  have  been  founded  during  the 
sixth  century.  Essex,  Wessex,  and  Sussex  were  the 
three  Saxon  monarchies  ;  and  there  were  likewise  three 
kingdoms  founded  by  the  Angles,  whose  collective  ter- 
ritory embraced  much  the  larger  part  of  Great  Bri^in, 
but  whose  origin  is  wrapped  in  even  deeper  obscurity 
than  the  other.  The  largest  of  these  was  the  kingdom 
of  Northumbcia,  which  extended  from  the  Humber  to 
the  Forth.  We  know  nothing  of  its  early  history.  The 
establishment  of  its  monarchy  is  ascribed  to  the  year 
547^  mider  which  date  the  Anglo- Saxon  chronicle 
states  that  "  Ida  came  to  the  throne,  from  whom  sprang 
the  royal  race  of  the  Northumbrians."  Besides  this, 
there  was  the  kingdom  of  East  Anglia,  which  included 
the  modern  Norfolk  and  Suffolk,  and  parts  of  other 
counties.  The  last  Anglian  kingdom  to  be  formed  was 
that  of  Mercia,  —  the  "  Marcb,"  or  frontier,  which  in 
process  of  time  came  to  embrace  most  of  the  central 
counties  of  England.  These  seven  monarchies  are 
often  popularly  but  loosely  spoken  of  as  the  Heptarchy. 
From  the  above  account  it  is  evident  that  the  Teu- 
tonic conquest  of  Great  Britain  was  chiefly  the  work 
of  two  tribes,  —  the  Saxons  and  the  Angles, —  and  that 
the  former  settled  mainly  in  the  southern  part  of  the 


Roman  and  Teutonic  Conquests.  19 

island ;  while  the  latter  occupied  the  centre  and  north 
of  England  and  the  southern  half  of  Scotland.  The 
Angles  had  a  marked  superiority,  both  in  their  numbers 
and  in  the  extent  of  territory  they  occupied.  When, 
therefore,  any  characteristic  differences  that  may  have 
originally  existed  between  the  tribes  began  to  disap- 
pear, and  the  two  peoples  blended  in  one,  it  is  no 
matter  of  wonder  that  the  name  of  the  larger  body  was 
given  to  the  couiitry  the  two  possessed  in  common. 
EnglisCj  or  English,  was  the  title  usually  given,  after 
the  ninth  century,  to  the  race  and  language.  Engla- 
land  (contracted,  England)^  or  "the  land  of  the  An- 
gles," came  later  to  be  the  name  apphed  to  the  whole 
country  from  the  Channel  to  the  Frith  of  Forth.  But, 
though  the  Angles  were  the  most  numerous,  the  Saxons 
must  have  been  the  first  to  come  into  contact  with 
the  native  population,  probably  through  marauding 
descents  upon  the  coasts;  for  it  was  the  title  which 
the  conquered  race  gave  to  all  the  invaders.  Even  to 
this  day,  to  the  Celtic  inhabitant  of  the  British  Isles, 
whether  Cymric  or  Gaelic,  the  Englishman  is  not  an 
Englishman,  but  a  Saxon.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
invaders  spoke  of  the  native  population  sometimes 
as  Britons,  sometimes  as  Welsh  (A.  S.  Welisc,  WelsCj  y 
*  foreign,'  from  A.  S.  IVealh,  a  'foreigner,'  from  Latin  \ 
Gallicus,  'belonging  to  Gaul'). 

Rise  of  the  Kingdom  of  Wessex.  —  The  con- 
quest of  the  country  was  no  rapid  or  easy  task.  The 
native  population  resisted  fiercely,  and  gave  way 
slowly.     Every  accession  of  territory  was  gained  at 


20  English  Language. 

the  cost  of  hard  fighting.  Still,  under  incessant  attacks, 
the  Britons  were  steadily,  though  slowly,  pushed  back 
towards  the  western  shore  of  the  island ;  and  at  the 
beginning  of  the  ninth  century  the  portion  of  coujitry 
directly  under  their  sway  was  limited  to  the  present 
county  of  Cornwall  (West  Wales),  to  the  present  prin- 
cipality of  Wales  (North  Wales),  and  to  a  strip  along 
the  northern  coast  of  England  and  southern  coast  of 
Scotland,  which  was  termed  Strathclyde.  But  the  in- 
vaders were  not  only  constantly  fighting  the  original 
Celtic  inhabitants,  they  were  as  constantly  engaged 
in  hostilities  among  themselves.  With  the  accession, 
however,  in  802,  of  Egbert  to  the  throne  of  Wessex, 
the  kingdom  orthe  West  Saxons  becarn'e""tlie  ruling 
oney"^^  a  supremacy  which  it  never  after  lost.  Before 
the  death  of  that  monarch,  which  took  place  in  ^^i^y 
his  authority  was  acknowledged  by  all  the  invaders 
that  had  settled  in  Great  Britain,  and  was  submitted  to 
by  the  people  of  West  and  of  North  Whales.  In  the  fol- 
lowing century,  during  the  reigns  of  Edward  the  Elder 
(901-925)  and  Athelstan  (925-940),  the  son  and 
grandson  of  Alfred  the  Great,  the  power  of  the  house 
of  Wessex  became  permanently  established  over  the 
whole  island ;  and  the  kings  of  that  line  were  recog- 
nized as  immediate  lords  of  all  the  English  inhabitants, 
and  as  superior  lords  of  all  the  Celtic.  At  this  point 
the  Teutonic  conquest  of  Britain  may  be  said  to  have 
been  fully  achieved. 


&JfFOE^^^^ 


CHAPTER   IT. 

THE  ANGLO-SAXON  LANGUAGE   AND   LITERA- 
TURK 

Language  of  the  Teutonic    Invaders. — Up 

to  the  accession  of  Egbert,  the  speech  of  the  Teutonic 
invaders  of  Britain,  while  everywhere  the  same  essen- 
tially, was  broken  up  into  a  number  of  dialects.  It  is 
not  likely  that  any  one  of  them  had  any  authority  out- 
side of  its  own  district :  none  of  them,  except,  possibly, 
the  Northumbrian,  possessed  a  literature.  The  Latin 
charters  of  the  early  kings  in  several  places  make  dis- 
tinct mention  of  the  dialect  of  Kent ;  but  in  that  no 
literary  work  was  then  composed,  or,  if  composed,  it 
has  not  been  handed  down  in  its  original  form.  With 
the  accession,  however,  of  the  royal  house  of  Wessex 
to  the  rule  of  Teutonic  England,  this  state  of  affairs 
underwent  a  change.  Linguistic  supremacy,  other 
things  being  equal,  is  sure  to  follow  political :  the 
dialect  of  Wessex,  accordingly,  became  the  cultivated', 
language  of  the  whole  people,  —  the  language  in  which: 
books  were  written,  and  laws  were  published.     During 


22  English  Language. 

the  reign  of  Alfred  (871-901)  it  began  to  develop  a 
literature,  which,  before  the  Norman  conquest,  attained 
no  slight  proportions ;  and  it  is  in  this  West-Saxon 
dialect  that  nearly  all  the  existing  monuments  of  our 
earhest  speech  were  composed.  Still,  besides  these. 
we  have  extant  a  few  interlinear  glosses  written  in 
the  language  of  Northumbria,  the  parent-tongue  of  the 
present  dialects  of  the  north  of  England  and  of  the 
Scottish  Lowlands. 

The  language  of  the  Teutonic  invaders  was  origi- 
nally called  by  them  Saxon  or  English,  according  as 
they  themselves  were  Saxons  or  Angles ;  and  it  con- 
tinued, even  down  to  the  eleventh  century,  to  be  thus 
variously  designated  in  their  own  Latin  writings.  Still 
the  superiority  of  the  Angles,  arising  from  vastly  greater 
numbers,  from  larger  territory,  and  perhaps  from  an 
earlier  cultivation  of  literature,  survived  ihe  decay  of 
their  political  power;  and  though  the  kings  of  the 
West  Saxons  attained  to  the  supremacy,  though  the 
West-Saxon  dialect  became  the  language  of  all  who 
wrote,  the  name  applied  both  to  the  race  and  the 
tongue  was  usually  Englisc,  that  is,  "  English."  From 
the  ninth  century  on,  it  is  almost  the  only  term  used 
by  those  who  spoke  it.  When,  in  the  sixteenth  and 
seventeenth  centuries,  a  revival  of  the  study  of  our 
early  speech  took  place,  it  was  sometimes  called  Sax- 
on, sometimes  English-Saxon,  and  sometimes  Anglo- 
Saxon  ;  and  the  last  designation,  as  recognizing  the- 
names  of  the  two  principal  invading  tribes,  has  been 
the  one  generally  adopted.     In  this  work  Anglo-Saxon 


A7tglo -Saxon  Language  and  Literature.    23 

will  be  used  to  mark  a  period  in  the  history  of  the 
English  language  extending  from  450  to  1150,  or 
nearly  a  century  after  the  Norman  conquest;  and, 
when  employed  without  limitation,  will  designate  that 
dialect  called  specifically  the  West  Saxon.  As  an 
equivalent  phrase,  "  English  of  the  Anglo  -  Saxon 
period  "  will  also  be  used. 

Differences  between  Anglo-Saxon  and  mod- 
ern English.  —  Both  in  grammar  and  in  vocabulary 
Anglo-Saxon  differed  widely  from  modern  English.  It 
was  what,  in  the  technical  language  of  grammarians, 
is  called  a  synthetic  language ;  that  is,  a  language, 
like  the  Latin,  which  expresses  by  changes  in  the 
form  of  the  words  themselves,  the  modifications  of 
meaning  they  undergo,  and  their  relations  to  one 
another  in  the  sentence.  It  had  two  principal  de- 
clensions of  the  noun,  with  several  subordinate  declen- 
sions under  one  of  them ;  it  had  two  declensions  of 
the  adjective,  according  as  its  substantive  was  definite 
or  indefinite ;  it  had  a  distinct  form  for  four  cases  in 
the  substantive ;  it  had  two  leading  conjugations  of 
the  verb,  with  subordinate  conjugations  under  each ; 
and,  as  a  necessary  accompaniment  of  this  fulness  of 
inflection,  it  possessed  a  complicated  syntax.  On  the 
other  hand,  modern  English  is  what  is  called  an  ana- 
lytic tongue.  The  relations  of  ideas  which  were  once 
expressed  by  termination  and  inflection  are  now,  with 
the  disappearance  of  these,  expressed,  instead,  by  the 
use  of  prepositions  and  their  cases,  and  by  the  arrange- 
ment of  words  in  the  sentence.     Still  the  grammatical 


24  English  Language, 

structure,  what  there  is  left  of  it,  is  purely  Teutonic, 
Even  more  marked  is  the  difference  between  the  an- 
cient and  the  modern  tongue  in  the  vocabulary.  A 
vast  number  of  words  belonging  to  the  Anglo-Saxon 
no  longer  exist  for  us,  even  in  a  changed  form  :  their 
places  have  been  supplied  by  borrowing  from  other 
languages,  especially  Latin  and  French,  to  an  extent 
Avhich,  if  vocabulary  alone  were  considered,  would 
make  it  doubtful  whether  our  tongue  is  Teutonic  or 
Romanic.  These  differences  between  the  earliest  and 
modern  English  are  essential  differences :  they  are 
not  the  characteristics  of  a  development  of  language, 
but  of  an  actual  transformation.  Hence  has  arisen 
the  necessity  of  a  special  term  applied  to  this  period 
of  our  speech.  A  nomenclature  which,  in  the  history 
of  our  tongue,  includes  under  one  name  the  English  of 
Cadmon  and  of  Tennyson  is  unsatisfactory  and  mis- 
leading,—  full  as  much  so  one  which  confounds  the 
language  of  Cadmon  and  of  Chaucer. 

Anglo  -  Saxon  Literature.  —  Poetry.  —  No 
written  literature  existed  among  the  Teutonic  invaders 
before  their  conversion  to  Christianity  in  the  seventh 
century ;  and  of  the  two  dialects  of  Anglo-Saxon,  the 
West-Saxon  and  the  Northumbrian,  the  former  is  the  only 
one  that  has  handed  down  productions  of  any  value. 
In  this  were  composed  no  small  number  of  works, 
both  in  prose  and  poetry.  The  latter,  as  in  all  early 
literatures,  was  much  the  most  important,  and  presents 
a  marked  contrast,  alike  in  character  and  constriction, 
to  the  verse  of  later  times.     Its  distinguishing  pccul- 


Anglo-Saxon  Language  and  Literature.     2$ 

iarity,  as  regards  form,  was,  that  it  was  alliterative; 
that  is  to  say,  it  depended,  not  upon  final  rhyme,  nor 
upon  regularity  of  accent,  nor  upon  the  existence  of  a 
fixed  number  of  syllables  in  the  line,  but  upon  the  fact 
that  a  certain  number  of  the  most  important  words  in 
the  same  line  began  with  the  same  letter.  According 
to  the  usual,  though  not  invariable,  arrangement,  two 
important  words  in  the  first  section  of  the  line,  and 
one  in  the  second  section,  began  with  the  same  letter 
(if  a  consonant),  or  with  vowels,  which  were  not 
required  to  be  the  same.  Unaccented  prefixes  were 
not  regarded,  as  the  ge  in  ge-wdt  of  the  following 
illustration  of  this  method  of  versification  :  — 

Ge-wat  pa  ofer  w^g-holva '  z^inde  ge-fysed 
i^lota  /amig-heals  *  fugle  gelicost. 

JVent  then  over  the  sea-wave,  wind-impelled. 
The  ^oat  with  3ow  of  foam,  likest  a  (5ird 

As  regards  subject,  Anglo-Saxon  poetry  was  mainly 
of  a  religious  character,  consisting  largely  of  versifica- 
tions of  the  narratives  contained  in  the  Bible,  and  of 
legends  of  saints  and  martyrs.  Still  its  most  impor- 
tant work  is  the  epic  of  Beo^^allf,  which  celebrates  the 
deeds  of  a  Danish  hero  of  that  name ;  and,  though  it 
exists  in  only  a  single  imperfect  manuscript  of  the 
tenth  century,  its  original  composition  is  generally 
thought  to  go  back  to  the  period  before  the  conversion 
of  the  people  to  Christianity.  The  next  most  impor^ 
tant  work  is  a  version  of  some  of  the  Bible  narratives, 
generally  attributed  to  Cadmon^  a  Northumbrian  monk 


26  English  Language. 

who  flourished  in  the  middle  of  the  seventh  century. 
But  the  work  as  it  now  exists  is  in  the  West- Saxon 
dialect,  and  not  in  that  in  which  it  was  originally  com- 
posed. The  whole  of  Anglo-Saxon  poetry  which  is 
extant  amounts  to  about  thirty  thousand  lines,  and  a 
large  proportion  of  this  has  been  preserved  in  two 
volumes.  One  of  them  is  the  Codex  Exoniensis ;  or, 
Exeter  Book,  —  a  collection  which  is  supposed  to  be 
the  one  mentioned  among  the  gifts  made  in  the 
eleventh  century  to  St.  Peter's  monastery  in  Exeter  by 
Bishop  Leofric.  It  is  there  spoken  of  as  "  a  large 
English  book  of  various  matters  composed  in  song- 
wise  "  {my eel  Englisc  doe  be  gehwylctcm  \ing1c7n  on 
leo^wisan  geworhi).  The  other  is  the  Codex  Ver- 
cellensis,  —  a  collection  found  in  1832  at  Vercelh  in 
Italy. 

Prose. — The  language  of  Anglo-Saxon  poetry 
stands  at  the  farthest  possible  remove  from  that  of 
daily  life.  It  constantly  repeats  the  same  ideas  in 
slightly  varying  phrases  ;  it  uses  numerous  compound, 
words  pecuhar  to  itself;  the  construction  of  its  sen- 
tences is  often  involved  and  intricate,  and  the  meaning 
in  consequence  obscure ;  and  through  it  all,  with  a 
certain  grandeur,  there  is  joined  a  certain  monotony 
from  the  little  range  of  thought  or  expression  found  in 
it.  On  the  other  hand,  Anglo-Saxon  prose  is  exceed- 
ingly simple  in  its  construction.  It  may  be  said  to 
begin  with  King  Alfred,  who  is,  indeed,  its  most  promi- 
nent author.  Like  the  poetry,  its  subject-matter  was 
mainly  religious,  and  to  a  large  extent  it  was  made 


Anglo-Sax  Oft  Language  a7id  Literature.     2y 

up  of  translations  from  the  Latin.  Still  its  most  valuable 
monuments  were  purely  original ;  one  being  a  collec- 
tion of  the  laws  of  various  kings,  and  the  other  a  series 
of  annals  called  "The  Anglo-Saxon  Chronicle,"  in 
which  the  events  of  each  year  are  recorded  under  that 
date.  Of  this  work  one  manuscript  extends  down  to 
the  death  of  King  Stephen  in  1154.  Anglo-Saxon 
prose  is  of  great  interest  from  a  linguistic  point  of 
view :  as  Hteratuie,  it  is,  in  general,  dull  beyond  de- 
scription. 

The  following  specimen  of  Anglo-Saxon  prose  is 
taken  from  the  account  given  to  King  Alfred  by  Oh- 
there,  one  of  his  Norse  subjects,  and  inserted  by  the 
former  into  his  translation  of  the  History  of  Paulus 
Orosius,  a  Spanish  priest  of  the  fifth  century.  In  the 
interlinear  gloss  the  modern  forms  of  the  Anglo-Saxon 
words  are,  when  not  used,  placed  between  parentheses  ; 
and  some  of  the  words  not  found  or  implied  in  the 
Anglo-Saxon,  but  employed  in  the  gloss,  are  placed 
between  brackets.  The  characters  t5  J>  represent  the 
two  sounds  of  th,  heard  in  such  words  as  this,  think^ 
then,  than,  death,  tithe. 

Ohjjere  saede  his  hlaforde,  ^Ifrede  kynincge,   j^set 

Ohthere        said     to  his  lord,  King  Alfred,  that 

he  ealra  NorSmanna  norSmest  bude.     He  cwaeS  faet 

he    of  all  Northmen  northmost        dwelt.        He  said  (quoth)  that 

he  bude  on  };3em  lande  nor5weardum  wi6     |^aWest-s^. 

he    dwelt     in       the       land  northward     along  (with)  the    West-sea . 

He  S3ede,  j^eah,  j^aet  paet  land  sy  swi5e  lang  norS  j^anon ; 

He     said,    though,  that    that     land     is     very      long     north      thence; 


28  English  Language. 

a,c  hit  is  eal  weste,  butan  on  feawum  stowum,  sticcem^- 

but    it     is    all  waste,  except  (but)  in       a  few         places,     [where]  here  and 

lum  \vicia5  Finnas  on  hunt6(5e  on  wintra,  and  on  sumerjT" 

there      dwell       Finns,   for  (in)  hunting      in     winter,      and      in      summer 

on  fiscoSe  be  j^sere  sae.  He  ssede  )'aet  he,  set  sumuni 

for  (in)  fishing  along  (by)  that  sea.     He       said       that  he,  at  a  certain  [some] 

cyrre,    wolde  fandian       hu     lange       j^aet      land 

time,  wished  [would]  to  find  out  by  trial   how         long  the  land 

norSrihte   l^ge;    o6(^e  hwaej^er  senig  man  be-norcSan 

due  north  lay;  or         whether        any         man  north  of 

paem  westene  bude.     pa       for      he  norSrihte  be  J^sem 

the         waste         dwelt.      Then  went  (fared)  he  due  north  along  (by)  the 

lande :    let    him  ealne  weg   j^aet  weste  land   on   ])^t 

land:      [he]  left  all  [the]    way        the       waste        land       on       the 

steorbord,  and  ]:a  wid-sse     on    bxcbord,    ]Ty   dagas. 

starboard,         and     the     wide-sea        on     [the]  larboard     three      days. 

pa  waes  he  swa  feor  norS  swa  j^a  hwcel-huntan  fyrrest 

"iTien  was     he      so       far     north       as      the       whale-hunters         farthest 

faratS.      pa       for      he     ]'a-gyt      norSrihte,  swa   feoi 

go '(fare).     Then  went  (fared)  he  still  (then-yet)      due  north,        so  far 

swa  he  mihte  on  f  xm  oSrum    prim  dagum  geseglian. 

as       ha      might      iu       the  second  [other]  three       days  sail. 


CHAPTER  III.  . 

INFLUENCE   OF  FOREIGN  TONGUES   UPON   THE 
ENGLISH   OF  THE  ANGLO-SAXON   PERIOD. 

Down  to  the  time  of  the  Norman  conquest  the 
Anglo-Saxon  form  of  the  Enghsh  language  remained 
essentially  the  same.  The  grammatical  modifications, 
in  particular,  that  it  underwent,  were  comparatively  few 
in  number,  and  slight  in  importance.  Some  inflections 
were  lost ;  cases  originally  possessing  different  endings 
came  to  have  the  same ;  and  the  tendency  of  verbs 
of  the  strong  conjugation  to  pass  over  to  the  weak 
began  even  thus  early  to  show  itself.  Still  none  of 
these  changes  were  violent  or  extensive  :  all  of  them 
took  place  in  accordance  with  the  natural  law  of 
development.  But  during  this  period  the  language 
came  into  contact  with  three  other  tongues,  which  to 
some  extent  affected  the  vocabulary,  and  perhaps,  also, 
the  form  of  expression.  These  were,  first,  the  speech 
of  the  native  Celtic  inhabitants ;  secondly,  the  Latin ; 
and,  thirdly,  the  Norse.  Of  these,  Latin  was  the  only 
one  which  at  that  time  added  any  appreciable  num- 

29 


30  English  Language. 

ber  of  words  to  the  language  of  literature.  Terms 
from  the  Celtic  or  the  Norse  may  have  been  adopted 
into  the  colloquial  speech ;  but  it  was  not  until  the 
break-up  of  the  classic  Anglo-Saxon,  which  followed 
the  Norman  conquest,  that  they  occur  to  any  extent 
in  writing. 

Celtic.  —  The  native  inhabitants  found  by  the  Teu- 
tonic invaders  in  the  part  of  Britain  they  overran 
belonged  to  the  Cymric  branch  of  the  Celtic  stock. 
As  the  conquest  was  the  work  of  several  hundred 
years,  it  might  be  supposed  that  the  vocabulary  of  each 
people  would  have  received  large  accessions  from  that 
of  the  other ;  but  such  was  not  the  case.  Very  few 
Celtic  terms  are  found  in  Anglo-Saxon  literature  ;  and 
not  many,  indeed,  appear  to  have  made  their  way  into 
written  English  in  the  centuries  immediately  following 
the  coming  of  the  Norman-French.  This  was,  without 
doubt,  due  mainly  to  the  little  intercourse  that  pre- 
vailed between  the  two  races  and  the  feelings  of 
hatred  developed  by  long  years  of  war.  The  fact  that 
the  native  inhabitants  were  Christians,  and  the  in- 
vaders heathen,  tended  also  to  widen  the  breach  be- 
tween them ;  but,  even  after  the  conversion  of  the 
Anglo-Saxons,  religious  differences  came  in  to  impart 
additional  bitterness  to  the  hostihty  that  sprang  from 
political  and  military  conflicts.  Bede,  \\Titing  in  the 
earlier  half  of  the  eighth  century,  says,  that  in  his  day 
it  was  not  the  custom  of  the  Britons  to  pay  any  respect 
to  the  faith  and  religion  of  the  English,  nor  to  corre- 
spond with   them  any  more  than  with  pagans.     In 


Celtic  Ekme7it  in  Eiiglish.  31 

consequence,  very  few  of  the  Celtic  words  fn  our 
speech  go  back  to  a  very  early  date.  Most  of  them,^ 
indeed,  that  came  into  the  language  before  a  com- 
paratively late  period,  were  usually  not  borrowed  di- 
rectly, but  apparently  went  first  into  Latin  or  French,  / 
and  from  them  found  their  way  into  English.  Thus 
glen,  which  occurs  in  our  earliest  speech,  may  have 
been  borrowed  directly  from  the  speech  of  the 
Britons ;  but  other  early,  though  not  Anglo-Saxon 
words,  such  as  basket,  bran,  brisket,  cabin,  piece,  quay, 
if  in  all  cases  of  Celtic  origin,  have  in  every  case 
gone  first  into  the  French,  and  from  that  tongue  have 
been  borrowed  by  us.  It  is  rarely  safe,  indeed,  to 
assert  positively  that  any  particular  word  found  in  our 
primitive  language  has  been  taken  from  the  Celtic; 
for  the  derivation  is  sure  to  be  disputed.  Certainly  the 
modern  importations  from  that  quarter  far  exceed  in 
number  the  earlier  ones.  Moreover,  they  have  generally' 
come  to  us  from  the  Gaelic  branch,  and  not  from  the 
Cymric :  and  in  most  cases  they  denote  objects  pe- 
culiar, or  originally  peculiar,  to  the  race  by  which  they 
were  first  employed.  The  words  bard,  brogue,  clany-- 
druid,  plaid,  shamrock,  whiskey,  for  illustration,  are 
all  of  Celtic  origin ;  but  none  of  them  go  back  to  the 
Anglo-Saxon  period,  and  most  of  them  are  of  com- 
paratively recent  introduction.  In  proper  names, 
whether  of  persons  or  places,  Celtic  terms  are  naturally 
much  more  common.  There  is  an  old  English  saying 
which  runs  as  follows  :  — 


32  English  Language. 

l^       By  Tre,i  Ros,2  Pol,3  Lan,*  Caer,^  and  Pen^ 
\^      You  know  the  most  of  Cornish  men. 

And  these  prefixes  and  several  others  are  still  numerous 
in  names  of  persons  and  places. 

It  is  to  be  added,  that  the  influence  of  Celtic  upon 
English  has  never  been  made  the  subject  of  thorough 
scientific  investigation.  Extravagant  claims  have  been 
and  are  still  put  forth  as  to  the  extent  of  this  element 
in  our  tongue.  In  particular,  long  lists  of  English 
words  have  been  often  given  as  derived  from  Celtic 
ones  more  or  less  resembling  them.  These  lists  are, 
as  a  general  rule,  utterly  untrustworthy.  In  many 
instances  there  is  no  relationship  whatever  between  the 
words  compared ;  in  other  instances  the  relationship 
is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  same  word  has  come  down 
from  the  primitive  Indo-European  to  both  the  Celtic 
and  Teutonic  branches ;  and  in  other  instances  still, 
where  there  has  been  actual  borrowing,  it  is  the  Celtic 
tongues  that  have  borrowed  from  the  English,  and  not 
the  English  from  the  Celtic.  At  best,  the  influence  of 
the  languages  of  this  stock  upon  our  speech  has  been 
shght. 

Latin.  —  Far  greater,  even  as  regards  Anglo-Saxon, 
was  the  influence  of  the  Latin.  This  first  manifested 
itself  in  the  seventh  century,  and  was  due,  like  most 
other  changes  in  the  vocabulary,  to  the  operation  of 
causes  not  in  themselves  of  a  linguistic  nature.     In  the 

1  A  place  or  dwelling. 

2  Cymric  r/ios,  a  moor;  Gaelic  ros.  a  headland.  8  A  marsh,  pool. 
*  An  enclosure,  church.  ^  a  cairn;  or,  from  Lat.  castra,  a  camp. 
6  A  mountain ;  in  Gaelic,  ben. 


Latin  Elevtent  m  Anglo-Saxo7t.  33 

year  597  a  band  of  Roman  missionaries,  sent  by  Pope 
GregQi^L,  came,  under  the  leadership  of  Augustine, 
to  the  kingdom  of  Kent,  with  the  object  of  converting 
the  people.  Their  efforts  were  successful ;  and  by  the 
end  of  the  following  century  all  of  the  Teutonic  in- 
habitants of  Britain  had  gone  over  from  heathenism 
to  the  Christian  faith.  One  immediate  consequence 
was  to  bring  into  prominence  and  power  in  the  coun- 
try a  body  of  ecclesiastics  who  not  only  carried  on  the 
church-service  in  Latin,  but  were  in  the  habit  of  using 
that  language  largely  in  conversation  and  in  writing. 
For  the  first  time  in  its  history,  Teutonic  Britain  wa^ 
brought  into  contact  with  the  superior  literature  and^ 
civilization  of  the  Continent.  The  inevitable  result 
was  to  introduce  into  the  Anglo-Saxon  a  number  of 
words  taken  from  the  Latin.  At  first  these  were  natu- 
rally connected  with  the  church-service,  or  with  eccle- 
siastical proceedings ;  but,  as  time  went  on,  a  variety 
of  terms  came  in,  denoting  objects  in  no  way  con- 
nected Avidi  religion. 

As  the  influence  of  Celtic  in  this  early  period  has 
been  overrated  by  many,  that  of  Latin  has  been  under- 
rated by  most.  The  words  borrowed  from  it  were  not 
onTy^  considerable  in  number,  they  were,  to  a  great 
extent,  thoroughly  assimilated.  From  the  Latin  nouns 
introduced,  new  adjectives  and  verbs  and  adverbs  were 
formed  by  the  addition  of  Teutonic  endings  ;  as  from 
cue,  'cook*  (from  la2iV coquus),  was  formed  the  verb 
cuceauj  'to  cook;'  from  regol,  'rule'  (from  Lat, 
reguld),  were   formed    the   adjective    regoiltc,    'rule- 


34  English  Language, 

like,'  'regular,'  and  the  adverb  regollice,  'regularly.' 
The  new  words  also  were  used  with  perfect  freedom 
to  form  compounds  with  the  native  ones ;  as,  for  in- 
stance, biscop,  'bishop'  (from  Lat.  episcopus),  enters 
into  composition  with  more  than  a  dozen  Anglo-Saxon 
ones,  of  which  list  biscop-rice,  *  bishopric,'  will  ser\'e 
as  an  illustration.  In  fact,  all  the  results  that  take 
place  now  when  words  from  one  tongue  are  brought 
in  large  numbers  into  another  can  be  found  exem- 
plified in  the  influence  of  Latin  upon  the  English  of 
this  early  period.  Some  of  the  native  words  began 
to  disappear  entirely  ;  thus,  fefor,  '  fever  '  (from  Lat. 
febris)^  drove  out  hri^e,  the  original  word  denoting 
that  disease.  Again  :  the  borrowed  and  the  native 
words  would  frequently  stand  side  by  side  ;  thus,  in 
King  Alfred's  writings,  as  well  as  later  ones,  7nunt, 
'mount'  (from  Lat.  mons,  mont-is),  is  used  inter- 
changeably with  ddn,  the  present  '  down,'  and  beorg, 
seen  in  our  '  iceberg.'  Before  the  Norman  conquest 
six  hundred  words  at  least  had  been  introduced  from 
Latin  into  the  Anglo-Saxon ;  some  of  them  occurring 
but  once  or  twice  in  the  literature  handed  down,  others 
met  with  frequently.  Were  we  to  include  in  this  list 
of  borrowed  terms  the  compounds  into  which  the 
borrowed  terms  enter,  the  whole  number  would  be 
swelled  to  three  or  four  times  that  above  given.  It  is 
also  to  be  marked,  that  not  only  were  nouns  diiectly 
borrowed,  but  also  adjectives  and  verbs,  though  to  a 
far  less  extent.  The  words  that  came  into  Anglo-Saxon 
from  the  seventh  century  on  constitute  the  first  real 


Scandinavian  Element  in  English.         35 

introduction  of  the  Latin  element  into  our  tongue  ; 
but,  in  accordance  with  the  terminology  generally 
adopted,  it  is  styled  "  Latin  of  the  Second  Period."       > 

Scandinavian. — The  extent  of  this  Latin  influ- 
ence upon  Anglo-Saxon  is  something  that  is  capable 
of  pretty  definite  determination  ;  but  such  is  not  the 
case  with  the  Scandinavian  element  that  comes  now 
to  be  considered.  The  descendants  of  the  Teutonic 
invaders,  not  much  more  than  a  century  after  their 
conversion  to  Christianity,  were  to  suffer  the  same  evils 
that  had  been  inflicted  by  their  own  heathen  free- 
booting  forefathers  upon  the  original  Celtic  popula- 
tion. Under  the  year  787  the  Anglo-Saxon  Chronicle 
states,  that  in  the  days  of  Bertric,  King  of  Wessex, 
three  shiploads  of  Northmen  landed  upon  the  coast 
of  Britain,  and  slew  the  officers  who  went  out  to  meet 
them  with  the  intent  of  taking  them  prisoners. 
"  These,"  it  continues,  "  were  the  first  ships  of  Danish 
men  who  sought  the  land  of  the  English  race."  This 
event  marks  the  beginning  of  a  steadily  increasing  ' 
series  of  marauding  descents  upon  the  seaboard,  and 
inroads  into  the  interior,  which,  in  the  latter  part  of 
the  ninth  century,  culminated  in  the  devastation  or 
subjection  of  nearly  aU  the  Anglo-Saxon  territory,  and 
the  permanent  settlement  of  a  large  part  of  it.  East, 
Anglia  was  conquered  in  870,  and  became  and  thence  • 
forwaMT^'mained  a  Danish  kingdom.  The  invaders 
also  overran  or  subdued  the  greater  portion  of  what  is 
now  Northern  and  Eastern  England.  Their  attempts 
upon  Wessex  were  finally,  however,  efl*ectually  checked 


36  English  Language. 

by  the  defeat  they  received  from  King  Alfred  at  Eding- 
ton,  in  Wiltshire,  in  878.     This  v/as  followed  by  the 
Peace   of  Wedmore,  in    accordance   with    which   the 
whole  country  was  divided  between  the  two  nations  \ 
the  Danes  on  their  part  agreeing  to  adopt  the  Chris- 
tian faith.     Even  after  this,  incursions  continued  to  be 
made ;  and  toward  the  close  of  the  tenth  century  the 
invasion  was  renewed  on  a  grander  scale.     It  ended  in 
estabhshing  upon  the   English  throne,  from    1013   to 
1042,  a  Danish  dynasty,  to  which  belonged  Sweyn, 
Canute,  Harold  Harefoot,  and  Hardicanute.     But  in 
every  case  the  new-comers  seem  to  have  made  no 
effort  to  keep  up  their  own  tongue,  but  adopted  the 
speech  of  the  people  among  whom  they  had  hxed 
their  homes.     The   Scandinavian   settlements  are,  for 
the  most  part,  limited  to   East  Anglia    (Norfolk  and 
Suffolk) ,  to  Lincolnshire  and  the  neighboring  counties 
on  the  west,  to  Yorkshire,  Lancashire,  Westmoreland, 
and  CunVoerland.     Their  existence  is  generally  con- 
ceded to  be  indicated  by  various  names  of  towns,  of 
which  those  ending  in  -by  (Old  Norse  byr,  a  '  dwelling,' 
'village'),  in  -thorp  or^torp   (O.  N.  \o?-p,  a  Miamlet,' 
'village  '),  in  -toft  (O.  N.  t^ft,  a  'homestead,'  'enclos- 
ure '),  and  in  -thwaitc  (O.  N.  \veiii,  a  'clearing'),  are 
among  the  most  common.     Examples  of  these  can  be 
seen  in  Whitby,  AUhorp,  Lowestoft,  and  Braithwaite. 

There  was,  accordingly,  no  shght  infusion  of  the 
Scandinavian  element  in  the  population  that  inhabited 
Britain.  But  the  extent  of  Scandinavian  influence 
upon  the  language  is  ditiicuit  to  ascertain  for  the  fob 


Scandinaviaii  Element  in  English.        37 

'owing  reasons  :  the  Old  Norse  and  the  Anglo-Saxon 
ire  both  Teutonic  Tongues  ;  they  both  descended  from 
I  cotffiiion'ancestor.  A  large  number  of  words  were 
ihe  same,  or  nearly  the  same,  in  both.  It  is  not  con- 
ceix'able  that  all  the  vocabulary  possessed  by  either  has 
been  handed  down  in  the  literature  of  each  that  has 
been  saved.  When,  therefore,  a  word  occurs  in  mod- 
ern English  which  is  not  found  in  Anglo-Saxon,  or  any 
other  Low  German  tongue,  but  is  found  in  Old  Norse, 
we  can  say  that  there  is  every  probability  that  it  came 
from  the  latter ;  but  we  cannot  say  this  with  certainty, 
for  it  may  have  existed  in  the  former,  and  not  have 
been  preserved.  There  is,  moreover,  a  special  diffi- 
culty in  this  question,  from  the  fact  that  it  was  in  the 
Anglian  kingdoms  that  these  foreign  settlements  were 
made.  Now,  the  existing  remains  of  Northumbrian 
speech,  which  is  an  Anglian  dialect  of  the  Anglo- 
Saxon,  show  plainly  that  this  dialect  was  much  closer 
allied  to  the  Old  Norse  than  is  the  West-Saxon,  which 
is  a  Saxon  dialect  of  Anglo-Saxon.  In  the  last-named 
the  infinitive  of  the  verb,  for  illustration,  regularly 
ends  ill  -an  ;  while  in  the  other  two  the  n  is  entirely 
or  occasionally  dropped.  In  West-Saxon  '  to  tell '  is 
tellan  ;  in  Northumbrian  it  is  tellan  or  tella  ;  in  Norse 
it  is  tcHa,  It  is,  therefore,  quite  conceivable,  though  it 
may  not  be  very  probable,  that  words  and  forms  which 
we  ascribe  to  the  Scandinavian  element  may,  in  fact, 
have  not  come  from  it,  but  from  the  speech  of  the 
Anglian  population ;  for  we  have  no  such  extensive 
vocabulary  of  the  Nordiumbrian  dialect  as  we  have  of 
the  West-Saxon. 


38  English  Language. 

Still  there  is  no  doubt  that  a  large  number  of  Norse 
words  were  introduced  at  this  time  into  the  spoken 
tongue ;  and  many  of  these  have  spread  beyond  their 
orfginal  limits,  and  linger  to  this  day  in  all  the  local 
dialects  of  Northern  England  and  Southern  Scotland. 
In  these,  indeed,  this  foreign  element  is  far  more  con- 
spicuous than  in  the  language  of  literature.  Still,  in 
regard  to  the  latter  also,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  the  Norse  words,  and  meanings  of  words,  in  many 
cases,  have  supplanted  those,  which,  up  to  the  time  of 
its  introduction,  had  been  the  prevailing  or  exclusive 
ones  in  Anglo-Saxon.  For  illustration,  sindon  was  the 
ordinary  form  for  the  plural  of  the  present  tense  of 
the  verb  be :  its  place  is  now  supplied  by  are,  the 
original  of  which  is  rare  in  Anglo-Saxon,  but  the 
regular  form  in  the  Norse.  So  from  the  Norse  kalla 
we  seem  to  get  our  verb  call ;  for  in  Anglo-Saxon 
the  corresponding  word  is  clipian,  'to  clepe.'  Again  : 
the  word  dream  is  common  to  both  tongues ;  but  in 
Anglo-Saxon  it  means  'joy,'  'music;'  and  it  is  from 
the  Norse  that  we  have  taken  the  modern  signification. 
Still  it  was  not  till  the  break-up  of  the  native  speech, 
that  followed  upon  the  Norman  conquest,  that  Norse 
words  came  to  be  used  to  any  extent  in  the  language 
of  literature. 


CHAPTER  R^ 

THE    NORMAN    CONQUEST    AND    THE    FRENCH 
LANGUAGE   IN   ENGLAND. 

Up  to  the  middle  of  the  eleventh  century  the  in- 
fluences that  had  been  at  work  upon  the  language  had 
not  been  productive  of  great  changes  \  still  less  were 
they  revolutionary  in  their  nature.  The  Norsemen  for 
a  time  brought  ruin  everywhere ;  but  whether  they 
desolated  temporarily,  or  settled  permanently,  they 
did  not  anywhere  materially  disturb  the  native  speech 
as  an  instrument  of  communication,  or  affect  in  the 
slightest  its  literary  supremacy.  Even  during  the  time 
they  ruled  the  country,  they  seem  not  to  have  made 
any  effort  to  introduce  into  it  the  use  of  their  own 
tongue.  But  a  series  of  events  was  now  to  take  place 
which  completely  changed  the  future  political  history 
of  the  English  people  ;  and  it  was  attended  by  as  pro- 
found and  wide-reaching  a  change  in  the  character  of 
English  speech.  In  the  latter  half  of  the  eleventh 
century  came  the  Norman  conquest  and  the  introduc- 
tion into  the  island  of  the  French  as  the  language  of 

39 


40  English  Language. 

the  higher  dasses.  The  most  powerful  effects  pro 
diiced  by  these  upon  the  native  tongue  did  not  fully 
show  themselves  until  three  centuries  had  passed ;  buf 
a  very  early  and  almost  immediate  effect  wrought 
upon  it  was  to  throw  it  into  a  state  of  confusion.  The 
English  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  period  sank  at  once  from 
its  position  as  the  language  of  culture,  whatever  that 
culture  was ;  and  when,  in  the  fourteenth  century,  it 
once  more  re-appears  as  the  language  of  classic  litera- 
ture, it  is  a  language  and  literature  widely  different 
from  that  which  had  been  supplanted  or  degraded  by 
the  coming  of  a  stranger  race.  From  the  Norman 
conquest  on,  the  native  speech  no  longer  followed  the 
natural  law  of  development  which  it  would  have  fol- 
lowed as  a  pure  Teutonic  tongue. 

To  explain  the  nature  of  the  changes  that  were 
wrought  in  it,  it  will  be  necessary  to  give  some  account 
of  the  men  whose  coming  caused  them,  and  of  the 
relations  which  for  a  long  time  existed  on  English  soil 
between  the  French  and  English  languages. 

The  Norman-French. — Toward  the  close  of 
the  ninth  century  a  band  of  Northmen,  under  "a^fe- 
nowned  leader  named  Rolf,  or  Rollo,  sailed  up  the 
Seine,  captured  Rouen,  ancf7^o^i^"tliat  point  as  a  cen- 
tre, carried  ^onli'coiftinuous  and  destructive  war  with 
the  native  inhabitants.  At  last,  in  912,  peace  was  made. 
To  the  invaders,  Charles  the  Simple,  the  King  of  the 
French,  ceded  a  large  territory  bordering  upon  the 
British  Channel,  which  was  called  from  them  Nor- 
mandy.    On  the  other  hand,  Rollo  agreed  to  becoiirre 


The  Norman  Conquest.  41 

the  feudal  vassal  of  the  French  monarch,  and  to  em- 
brace the  Christian  religion.  These  conditions  were 
fully  carried  into  effect ;  and  the  Northmen  became  the 
undisturbed  owners  of  the  district  given  up  to  them, 
and,  along  with  the  religion  of  their  subjects,  they  also 
adopted  their  language. 

The  Norman  Conquest. — The  relations  be- 
tween the  English  and  the  Norman-French  began  to 
assume  about  the  beginning  of  the  eleventh  century  a 
somewhat  close  character  by  the  marriage,  in  1002,  of 
the  Anglo-Saxon  king,  Ethelred  IL,  to  Emma,  sister  of 
Richard  III.,  the  fifth  duke  of  Normandy.  One  fruit 
of  this  union  was  a  son,  Edward,  usually  styled  the 
Confessor,  who  reigned  over  England  from  1043  to 
1066.  But  the  early  years  of  this  prince  were  spent 
at  the  court  of  his  uncles  Richard  and  Robert,  dukes 
of  Normandy ;  and  when,  after  the  termination  of  the 
Danish  dynasty  in  1042,  he  was  recalled  to  his  native 
country,  and  placed  upon  the  throne,  he  continued  to 
retain  a  preference  for  the  friends  and  the  tastes  of 
his  youth.  Norman-French  noblemen  v/ere  assigned 
positions  of  responsibility  and  power ;  Norman-French 
priests  were  made  EngUsh  bishops ;  and,  though  a  rev- 
olution in  1052  drove  out  most  of  the  foreign  favorites, 
the  foreign  influence  could  not  have  passed  away 
utterly.  Early  in  1066  Edward  the  Confessor  died; 
and  Harold,  the  most  powerful  nobleman  in  the  king- 
dom, was  chosen  king  in  his  stead.  But  a  claim  to 
the  throne  was  immediately  made  by  William,  Duke 
of  Normandy,  a  cousin  of  the  deceased  monarch.     To 


42  Engcisii  Language, 

support  it,  he  invaded  England  in  the  autumn  of  the 
same  year ;  and  the  battle  of  Hastings,  fought  on  the 
14th  of  October,  1066,  resulted  in  the  defeat  and 
death  of  Harold  and  the  subjection  of  the  whole 
country. 

Effect  of  the  Conquest  upon  the  Native 
Language.  —  Two  general  facts  in  regard  to  language 
are  at  once  apparent  as  the  effect  of  the  conquest. 
One  is,  that,  though  the  native  tongue  continued  to 
be  spoken  by  the  great  majority  of  the  population,  it 
went  out  of  use  as  the  language  of  high  culture.  It 
was  no  longer  taught  in  the  schools  ;  it  was  no  longer 
employed  at  the  court  of  the  king,  or  the  castles  of 
the  nobles,  or  in  the  services  of  the  church.  This  dis- 
placement was  probably  slow  at  first ;  but  it  was  done 
effectually  at  last.  The  second  fact  is,  that,  from  the 
first,  the  higher  classes,  both  lay  and  ecclesiastical,  that 
came  in  with  the  conquest,  used  either  Latin  or  French  ; 
the  latter,  in  process  of  time,  growing  more  and  more 
to  be  the  language,  not  alone  of  polite  society,  but  of 
literature.  We  have,  in  consequence,  the  singular 
spectacle  of  two  tongues  flourishing  side  by  side  in  the 
same  country,  and  yet  for  centuries  so  utterly  distinct 
and  independent,  that  neither  can  be  said  to  have 
exerted  much  direct  appreciable  influence  upon  the 
other,  though  in  each  case  the  indirect  influence  was 
great.  To  understand  the  relations  between  these 
two  tongues  involves  an  acquaintance  with  the  rela- 
tions existing  between  the  two  races  that  spoke  them ; 
and  in  both  cases  the  knowledge  we  have,  especially 


The  Noi'inan  Conquest.  43 

of  the  earlier  period,  is  obscure.  Our  information, 
indeed,  in  regard  to  our  speech,  is  based  almost 
exclusively  upon  incidental  notices  contained  in  the 
Latin  chronicles  written  in  the  twelfth  century  and  in 
the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth ;  and  as  in  these  the 
subject  of  language  is  rarely  treated  of  specifically, 
and  never  at  any  length,  the  inferences  that  are  drawn 
can  only  be  looked  upon  as  probable,  and  not  as  cer- 
tain. From  the  latter  part  of  the  thirteenth  century 
on,  the  native  tongue  is  more  an  object  of  considera- 
tion in  itself,  and  our  knowledge  of  the  relations  be- 
tween French  and  English  becomes  far  more  positive 
and  precise.  A  fev/  of  the  more  important  statements 
will  •  be  quoted ;  but  in  every  case  it  is  necessary  to 
bear  in  mind,  not  only  what  was  said,  but  when  il;  was 
said. 

Up  to  a  comparatively  late  period,  the  History  which 
purported  to  be  written  by  Ingulph,  appointed  Abbot 
of  Croyland  in  1076,  was  regarded  as  authentic,  and 
its  statements  were  implicitly  credited.  In  this  work 
it  was  asserted,  that,  after  the  accession  of  William,  the 
English  race  was  held  in  contempt  and  detestation ; 
that  the  Normans  so  abhorred  the  language,  that  the 
laws  of  the  land  and  the  decrees  of  the  king  were  put 
into  Latin;  and  that  in  the  schools  the  elements  of 
grammar  were  imparted  in  French.  Though  this  His- 
tory was  professedly  the  production  of  a  contemporary 
of  the  Conqueror,  there  is  no  doubt  that  much,  if  not 
all,  of  it,  was  a  forgery  of  several  centuries  later.  Its 
statements  can  therefore  have  no  further  weight  than 


44  English  Language. 

would  belong  to  writings  of  that  later  period ;  that  is^ 
really  none  at  all.  Nevertheless,  there  is  satisfactory 
evidence  that  contempt  was  both  felt  and  expressed  by 
the  foreigners  for  the  native  population,  —  a  contempt 
which  was  naturally  extended  to  the  language.  Henry 
of  Huntingdon,  who  flourished  in  the  former  half  of 
the  twelfth  century,  in  speaking  of  the  state  of  the 
country  at  the  death  of  William  the  Conqueror,  as- 
serted that  it  was  a  disgrace  to  be  even  called  an 
Englishman.  About  the  beginning  of  tlie  thirteenth 
century  Gervase,  who  was  born  at  Tilbury  in  Essex, 
but  entered  the  service  of  the  Emperor  of  Germany, 
wrote,  among  other  things,  an  account  of  his  native 
land.  In  this,  while  speaking  of  Harold,  the  last  of 
the  Anglo-Saxon  kings,  he  stated  that  it  was  then  the 
custom  of  the  noblest  of  the  English  to  have  their  sons 
educated  among  the  French  for  the  sake  of  gaining 
proficiency  in  arms  and  for  the  purpose  of  removing 
the  barbarism  of  the  native  language.  While  this  as- 
sertion is  of  not  the  slightest  value  as  evidence  of  the 
state  of  affairs  in  the  time  of  Edward  the  Confessor,  it 
is  of  value  as  to  the  state  of  opinion  in  the  time  of 
King  John.  The  tongue  of  the  common  people  was, 
in  truth,  in  the  eyes  of  the  Norman  a  barbarous  one. 
He  made  not  the  slightest  attempt  to  destroy  it :  he 
contented  himself  with  simply  despising  it.  To  him  it 
was  the  rude  speech  of  a  rude  people  which  had  been 
subjected  to  the  sway  of  a  superior  race. 

French  and  English  Languages  on  English 
soil. — English;  indeed,  after  the  conquest,  did  not 


French  and  English  in  England.  45 

cease  to  be  a  written  language  :  it  did  cease  to  be  a 
cultivated  one.  None  of  those  conservative  influences 
were  cast  about  it  which  are  sure  to  prevent  rapid  and 
radical  changes  in  any  tongue  that  is  regularly  em- 
ployed by  the  educated.  But  the  great  body  of  the 
people  clung  to  it.  They  were  ignorant,  and  they  cor- 
rupted it ;  but,  as  they  could  not  or  would  not  learn 
the  language  of  the  higher  classes,  they  preserved  it. 
While  French,  therefore,  continued  to  remain  for  cen- 
turies the  tongue  employed  in  polite  conversation, 
while  it  and  Latin  were  the  ones  mainly  employed  in 
literature,  the  native  speech  could  not  fail,  as  time 
went  on,  to  make  its  influence  more  and  more  felt  by 
the  mere  weight  of  numbers  on  the  part  of  those 
using  it.  There  is  a  general  impression  that  the  no- 
bility did  not  learn  to  speak  English  till  the  fourteenth 
century ;  and  this  may  be  true  to  this  extent,  that  the 
subjects  of  the  English  king  who  were  born  on  the 
Continent,  and  spent  there  most  of  their  lives,  never 
learned  to  speak  it  at  all.  But  it  is  against  all  proba- 
bility that  those  members  of  the  higher  classes  who 
were  brought  up  in  the  island,  whose  interests  mainly 
lay  there,  whose  lives  were  largely  passed  there,  should 
not  have  been  able  to  understand  and  make  use  of  the 
speech  of  the  great  body  of  the  common  people  with 
whom  they  came  into  daily  contact.  From  the  very 
first,  necessity  would  have  forced  them  at  times  to 
employ  English,  though  French  were  the  language  of 
their  choice.  This  view  is  borne  out  by  numerous  in- 
cidental references  to  the  subject  which   have   been 


46  English  Language. 

handed  down.  In  particular,  ignorance  of  English  on 
the  part  of  the  clergy  came  to  be  regarded  as  a  serious 
objection.  The  historian  Matthew  of  Paris,  who 
flourished  during  the  reign  of  Henry  III.  (1216- 
1272),  relates  that  Sewal,  Archbishop  of  York,  who 
died  in  1258,  wrote  a  letter  of  remonstrance  to  the 
Pope,  complaining  of  the  way  in  which  he  had  been 
harassed  by  suspensions,  examinations,  and  in  other 
ways,  because  he  refused  to  accept  of  inexperienced 
persons  recommended  by  the  pontiff  to  benefices,  on 
the  ground  that  they  were  ignorant  of  the  English 
language.  One  of  the  chief  reasons  of  the  unpopu- 
larity of  Henry  HI.  was  his  preference  for  favorites 
who  came  from  his  dominions  on  the  Continent ;  and 
the  writer  of  the  chronicle  which  goes  under  the  name 
of  Matthew  of  Westminster's,  in  giving  an  account  of 
the  events  which  took  place  in  1263,  during  the  civil 
war  between  the  barons  and  that  monarch,  states  that 
whoever  was  unable  to  speak  the  English  language  was 
regarded  by  the  common  people  as  a  vile  and  con- 
temptible person.  If  this  assertion  be  tme,  there  is  no 
escape  from  the  legitimate  inference  that  the  nobihty 
whose  homes  were  in  the  island  must  have  been 
familiar  with  the  native  speech. 

Rise  in  Importance  of  the  English.  —  But  as 
it  was  political  events  that  had  brought  about  the 
degradation  of  the  English  language,  so  it  was  to 
political  events  that  its  gradual  rise  in  importance 
and  estimation  was  mainly  due.  The  continued,  and 
within  certain  limits  probably  increasing,  use  of  the 


French  ajtd  English  in  England,.  47 

French  speech  on  the  soil  of  Great  Britain,  lay  largely 
in  the  fact  that  it  was  likewise  the  speech  of  a  vast 
population  on  the  Continent  who  were  subject  to  the 
same  ruler  as  the  islanders.  The  possessions  of  Henry 
II.,  for  instance,  embraced  full  half  of  what  is  now 
France,  and  far  exceeded  in  extent  the  territory  under 
the  direct  control  of  the  French  monarch  himself.  So 
long  as  this  state  of  things  lasted,  an  uncultivated 
tongue  like  the  English  was  at  an  immense  disadvan- 
tage as  compared  with  a  cultivated  one  existing  along- 
side of  it.  Even  the  island  itself  was,  to  a  great  de- 
gree, simply  looked  upon  as  a  storehouse  of  men  and 
materials,  from  which  its  kings  could  draw  supplies  to 
prosecute  their  designs  of  conquest  upon  the  Conti- 
nent ;  and  the  language  itself  could  not  hope  to  be 
rated  at  as  high  a  value  as  the  country  in  which  it  was 
the  speech  of  the  lower  classes  only.  But  during  the 
thirteenth  century  events  occurred  that  changed  the 
condition  of  affairs.  Chief  among  these  was  the* 
gradual  loss  of  the  possessions  held  by  the  English 
kings  in  France,  and,  in  particular,  the  loss  of  Nor- 
mandy in  1204,  during  the  reign  of  John.  This  had 
the  inevitable  effect  of  largely  transferring  the  interests 
of  the  nobihty  from  the  Continent  to  the  Island. 
Henceforth  their  lot  was  to  be  cast  amid  the  English- 
speaking  race  that  dwelt  upon  the  estates  held  by 
them  in  England.  The  breach  which  naturally  arose, 
in  consequence,  between  the  people  of  the  Island  and 
of  the  Continent,  was  stilf  further  widened  by  the 
action  taken  in  1244  by  the  French  king,  Louis  IX. 


4.8  English  Language. 

In  that  year  he  summoned  to  Paris  all  the  nobility  ol 
England  who  had  possessions  in  France,  and  gave 
them  their  choice  of  relinquishing  their  property  in 
the  one  country  or  the  other,  because  it  was  impos- 
sible for  the  same  man  to  be  the  subject  of  two  rulers, 
always  in  rivalry,  and  often  in  hostility.  They  were, 
accordingly,  obliged  to  give  up  one  or  the  other.  As 
soon  as  the  knowledge  of  this  transaction  came  to  the 
ears  of  the  English  king,  he  at  once  ordered  that  all 
Frenchmen,  especially  Normans,  who  had  possessions 
in  England,  should  be  deprived  of  their  property. 

The  necessary  effect  of  these  political  changes  was 
first  to  cause  the  English  and  the  French  to  look  upon 
each  other  more  and  more  as  different  peoples ; 
secondly,  to  hasten  the  union  between  the  English  of 
native  and  of  foreign  descent,  and  to  wipe  out  distinc- 
tions of  any  kind  heretofore  existing  between  them. 
Yet  it  is  clear  that  there  could  never  be  a  complete 
union  without  the  adoption  of  a  common  language ; 
and,  in  spite  of  these  events,  this  had  not  yet  taken 
place  at  the  end  of  the  thirteenth  century.  On  this 
point  we  have  the  direct  and  unimpeachable  testimony 
of  a  contemporary  writer,  which,  though  often  quoted, 
is  too  important  to  be  passed  over  here.  Robert  of 
Gloucester,  a  monk  who  flourished  in  the  latter  half 
of  the  thirteenth  century,  wrote  a  rhymed  chronicle  of 
Britain  and  England,  down  to  the  year  1272.  In 
giving  an  account  of  the  conquest  by  William,  he  is 
led  to  speak  of  the  two  languages  still  existing  in  the 


French  and  English  i7i  England.         49 

country  side  by  side,  and  this  he  does  in  the  following 
u^ords :  — 

Thus  com,  lo !  Engelond  into  Normandies  hond. 

And  the  Normans  ne  couthe  speke  tho  bote  hor  owe  speche, 

And  speke  French  as  hii  dude  atom  and  hor  children  dude 

also  teche. 
So  that  heiemen  of  this  lond,  that  of  hor  blod  come, 
Holdeth  alle  thulke  speche  that  hii  of  hom  nome. 
Vor  bote  a  man  conne  Frenss,  me  telth  of  him  lute  ; 
Ac  lowe  men  holdeth  to  Engliss  and  to  hor  owe  speche  yute. 
Ich  wene  ther  ne  beth  in  al  the  world  contreyes  none 
That  ne  holdeth  to  hor  owe  speche  bote  Engelond  oneA 

From  this  it  is  evident  that  French  was  still  the 
language  of  the  higher  classes,  and  that  to  be  ignorant 
of  it  was  in  a  measure  a  social  stigma.  Nor  did  this 
feeling  speedily  die  out.  In  the  earlier  half  of  the 
following  century  Ralph  Higden,  a  monk  of  St.  Wei  • 
burgh's,  in  Chester,  wrote  in  Latin  a  chronicle  of  the 
world,  under  the  title  of  "  Polychronicon ;  "  and  in  it 
he  gave  an  account  of  the  languages  spoken  in  Eng- 
land, and  of  the  corruption  that  had  crept  into  the 
native  speech.  A  translation  of  this  work  was  com- 
pleted in  1387,  by  John  of  Trevisa,  vicar  of  Berkeley; 


*  Lo !  thus  came  England  into  the  possession  of  Normandy. 
And  the  Normans  could  then  speak  only  their  own  speech, 
And  spoke  French  as  they  did  at  home,  and  caused  their  children  also  to 

be  taught  it. 
So  that  noblemen  of  this  land,  that  come  of  their  blood, 
Hold  all  the  same  speech  that  ihey  from  them  received. 
For  unless  a  man  knows  French,  he  is  little  thought  of; 
But  low  men  keep  to  English,  and  to  their  own  speech  yet. 
I  think  there  be  not  in  all  the  world  any  countries 
That  do  not  hold  to  their  own  speech  but  England  alone. 


50  English  Lmiguage. 

and  the  passage  explanatory  of  the  corruption  that  had 
overtaken  the  tongue  he  rendered  in  the  following 
words : — 

This  apeyrj'ng  of  the  burth-tonge  ys  bycause  of  twey 
thinges :  —  on  ys,  for  chyldern  in  scole,  agenes  the  vsage  and 
manere  of  al  other  nacions,  buth  compelled  for  to  leue  here  oune 
longage,  and  for  to  construe  here  lessons  and  here  thinges  a 
Freynsch,  and  habbeth,  suththe  the  Normans  come  furst  into 
Engelond.  xMso  gentil  men  children  buth  ytaught  for  to  speke 
Freynsch  fram  tyme  that  a  buth  yrokked  in  here  cradel,  and 
conneth  speke,  and  playe  with  a  child  hys  brouch;  and  oplon- 
dysch  men  wol  lykne  ham-sylf  to  gentil  men,  and  fondeth  with 
gret  bysynes  for  to  speke  Freynsch,  for  to  be  more  ytold  of.i 

Such  was  the  state  of  things  in  the  former  part  of 
the  fourteenth  century.  But  by  the  middle  of  that 
century  the  movement  toward  the  general  adoption  of 
the  native  speech  had  acquired  a  momentum  which 
could  no  longer  be  resisted.  From  this  period,  signs 
of  the  employment  of  English  by  all  classes  in  the 
community  begin  to  multiply.  Traditions  connected 
with  education  are  among  the  last  to  lose  their  hold 
upon  the  mind :  practices  connected  with  it  are 
among  the  last  to  be  abandoned.  But,  in  the  latter 
half  of  the  fourteenth  centurv,  instruction  through  the 


*  This  impairing  of  the  birth-tongue  is  because  of  two  things:  one  Ls, 
because  children  in  school,  against  the  usage  and  manner  of  all  other  naiions, 
are  compelled  to  leave  their  own  language,  and  to  construe  their  lessons  and 
their  matters  in  French,  and  have,  since  the  Normans  came  first  into  England. 
Also,  gentlemen's  children  are  taught  to  speak  French  from  (the)  lime  that 
they  are  rocked  in  their  cradle,  and  can  speak,  and  play  with  a  child's  brooch; 
and  back-country  men  (or  rustics)  wish  to  make  themselves  like  gentlemen, 
and  strive  with  great  earnestness  to  speak  French,  m  order  to  be  thought  the 
more  of. 


French  and  English  in  Englatid.         5 1 

medium  of  the  French  had  to  a  great  extent  been 
supplanted  by  instruction  through  the  medium  ( if  the 
Enghsh.  Upre,  again,  we  have  positive  testimony. 
John  of  Trevisa,  to  his  version,  which  has  just  been 
given,  of  Higden's  account,  added  a  correction  of  his 
statements,  which  was  rendered  necessary  by  the 
changes  that  had  taken  place  between  the  time  the 
book  was  written  and  the  time  it  was  translated.  He 
asserted,  that,  since  the  great  pestilence  of  1349,  the 
system  of  instruction  had  been  revolutionized.  Upon 
the  remark  of  his  author  that  the  children  of  the 
higher  classes  were  taught  French  from  their  cradles, 
he  makes  the  following  comment :  — 

Thys  manere  was  moche  yvsed  tofore  the  furste  moreyn, 
and  ys  seththe  somdel  ychaunged.  For  lohan  Cornwal,  a 
mayster  of  gramere,  chayngede  the  lore  in  gramer-scole,  and 
construccion  of  Freynsch  into  Englysch;  and  Richard  Pen- 
crych  lurnede  that  manere  techyng  of  hym,  and  other  men  of 
Pencrych ;  so  that  now,  the  yer  of  oure  Lord  a  thousond  thre . 
hondred  foure  score  and  fyue,  of  the  secunde  Kyng  Richard 
after  the  conquest  nyne,  in  al  the  gramer-scoles  of  Engelond 
childern  leueth  Frensch  and  construeth  and  lurneth  an  Eng- 
lysch, and  habbeth  therby  avauntage  in  on  syde  and  desavauntage 
yn  another :  here  avauntage  ys,  that  a  lurneth  here  graraer  yn 
lasse  tyme  than  childern  wer  ywoned  to  do;  disavauntage  ys, 
that  now  childern  of  gramer-scole  conneth  no  more  Frensch 
than  can  here  lift  heele,  and  that  ys  harm  for  ham,  and  a 
scholle  passe  the  se  and  trauayle  in  strange  londes,  and  in 
meny  caas  also.  Also  gentil  men  habbeth  now  moche  yleft  for 
to  teche  here  childern  Frensch.^ 

1  This  custom  was  much  used  before  the  first  pestilei  ce,  and  is  since 
somewhat  changed.  For  John  Cornwall,  a  teacher  of  grammar,  changed 
the  method  of  instruction  in  the  grammar-school,  and  (the)  construing  from 


52  English  Language. 

Doubtless  this  inevitable  change  was  looked  upor; 
by  many  with  much  disfavor.  The  growing  ignorance 
of  a  tongue  which  was  widely  used  throughout  Chris- 
tendom, and  seemed  to  have  before  it  a  great  future, 
was  regarded  almost  in  the  light  of  a  calamity. 
Trevisa's  remark,  that  the  children  in  the  grammar- 
schools  knew  '•  no  more  French  than  their  left  heel," 
was  re-echoed  in  the  alliterative  poem  of  "  Piers  Plough- 
man," by  Langlande,  who  is,  in  theory  at  least,  sup- 
posed to  represent  the  sentiments  of  the  common 
people.  In  a  passage  inveighing  against  the  general 
ignorance  prevalent  in  his  day,  he  says,  — 

Gramer,  the  grounde  of  all,  bi-gyleth  now  children  ; 
For  is  none  of  this  nevve  clerkes,  whoso  nymeth  hede, 
That  can  versifye  faire,  ne  formalich  enditen ; 
No  nought  on  amonge  an  hundreth,  that  an  auctour  can  con- 
strue, 
Ne  rede  a  lettre  in  any  langage  but  in  Latyn  or  in  Englissh.i 

French  into  English;  and  Richard  Pencrich  learned  from  him  that  manner  of 
teaching,  and  other  men  from  Pencrich:  so  that  now,  the  year  of  our  Lord 
a  thousand  three  hundred  four  score  and  five,  the  ninth  (year  of  the  reign)  of 
the  second  king  Richard  after  the  conquest,  in  all  the  grammar-schools  of 
England  children  give  up  French,  and  construe  and  learn  in  English,  and 
have  thereby  advantage  on  one  side,  and  disadvantage  on  another.     Their 
advantage  is,  that  they  learn  their  grammar  in  less  time  than  children  were 
w^nt  to  do;    (the)  disadvantage  is,  that  now  grammar-school  children   know 
no  more  French  than  their  left  heel  knows:  and  that  is  harm  for  them,  if  they 
shall  pass  the  sea  and  travel  in  strange  lands,  and  in  many  (other)  cases  also. 
Also,  gendemen  have  now  much  left  teaching  their  children  French." 
1  Grammar,  the  ground  of  all  (studies),  now  leads  astray  children; 
For  there  is  no  one  of  these  new  clerks,  whoso  taketh  heed, 
That  can  versify  fairly,  or  compose  in  established  form;  2 
And  not  one  amongst  an  hundred  that  can  construe  an  author, 
Nor  read  a  letter  in  any  language  but  in  Latin  or  in  English. 
2  Either  in  prose  ?  or  alliterative  verse  ? 


FrencJi  and  En^lisJi  in  En^^land.         VV' 

Yet,  in  fact,  this  kind  of  instruction  in  French  wai 
far  from  being  utterly  abandoned  at  that  period.^  Even 
as  late  as  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.,  at  the  time  of  the 
dissolution  of  the  monasteries,  it  was  still  found  taught 
in  the  conventual  schools,  —  at  any  rate,  in  one  case. 
A  letter  to  Cromwell  from  John  Ap  Rice,  one  of  the 
visitors  of  religious  houses,  relating  to  the  monastery 
of  Laycock  in  Wiltshire,  mentions  a  form  of  French 
as  still  being  used  there  which  was  certainly  then  used 
by  no  people  to  whom  that  tongue  was  a  native  speech. 
"The  house,"  he  says,  "is  very  clean,  well-repaired, 
and  well-ordered  :  and  one  thing  I  observed  worthy 
the  advertisement  (i.e.  notice)  there.  The  Ladies  have 
their  Rule,  the  Institutes  of  their  Religion,  and  the 
ceremonies  of  the  same  written  in  the  French  tongue, 
which  they  understand  well,  and  are  very  perfitt  in  the 
same.  Albeit  that  it  varieth  from  the  vulgar  French 
that  is  now  used,  and  is  much  like  the  French  that 
the  Common  Law  is  ^^Titten  in." 

But  more  convincing  evidence  even  than  the  change 
in  the  method  of  instruction  in  the  schools,  as  to  the 
general  adoption  of  English  by  all  classes,  can  be  found 
in  the  act  in  regard  to  the  pleadings  in  the  law- 
courts,  which  was  passed  by  the  Parliament  held  at 
Westminster  in  1362,  the  thirty-sixdx  year  of  Edward 
III.  The  preamble  recites  in  full  the  reasons  which 
led  to  the  making  of  the  statute ;  and,  in  spite  of  the 
verbiage  usual  in  documents  of  this  kind,  most  of  it 
is  well  worthy  quotation.  "  Because  it  is  often  shewed 
to  the  king,"  it  said,  "by  the  prelates,  dukes,  earls, 


54  E^iglish  Language. 

barons,  and  all  the  commonalty,  of  the  great  mischiefi 
which  have  happened  to  divers  of  the  realm,  because 
the  laws,  customs,  and  statutes  of  this  realm  be  not 
commonly  known  in  the  same  realm,  for  that  they 
be  pleaded,  showed,  and  judged  in  the  French  tongue, 
whi^h  is  much  unknown  in  the  said  realm  :  so  that  the 
people  who  do  implead  or  be  impleaded  in  the  king's 
court,  and  in  the  courts  of  otiiers,  have  no  knowledge 
nor  understanding  of  that  which  is  said  for  them  or 
against  them  by  their  Serjeants  and  other  pleaders ; 
and  that  reasonably  the  said  laws  and  customs  shall  be 
the  sooner  learned  and  known  and  better  understood 
in  the  tongue  used  in  the  said  realm,  and  by  so  much 
every  man  of  the  said  realm  may  the  better  govern 
himself  without  offending  of  the  law,  and  the  better 
keep,  save,  and  defend  his  heritage  and  possessions ; 
and  in  divers  regions  and  countries,  where  the  king, 
the  nobles,  and  others  of  the  said  realm  have  been, 
good  governance  and  full  right  is  done  to  every  per- 
son, because  that  their  laws  and  customs  be  learned 
and  used  in  the  tongue  of  the  country:  the  king, 
desiring  the  good  governance  and  tranquillity  of  his 
people,  and  to  put  out  and  eschew  the  harms  and 
mischiefs,  which  do  or  may  happen  in  this  behalf  by 
the  occasions  aforesaid,  hath  ordained  and  established 
by  the  assent  aforesaid,  that  all  pleas  which  shall  be 
pleaded  in  his  courts  whatsoever,  before  any  of  his 
justices  whatsoever,  or  in  his  other  places,  or  before 
any  of  his  other  ministers  whatsoever,  or  in  the  courts 
and  places  of  any  other  lords  whatsoever  within  the 


Rise  of  Modem  English  Literature.       55 

realm,  shall  be  pleaded,  shewed,  defended,  answered, 
debated,  and  judged  in  the  English  tongue."  This  law 
went  into  operation  at  the  beginning  of  the  following 
year.  It  is  a  natural  inference,  from  the  half-measures 
attending  this  one  piece  of  legislation,  that  the  English 
element  had  become  predominant,  not  only  in  the 
national  speech,  but  in  the  national  character.  In 
curious  contrast  with  some  of  the  declarations  of  the 
preamble,  the  statute  was  published  in  the  very  language 
it  proscribed ;  and,  while  it  enacted  that  the  pleadings 
should  be  in  the  English  tongue,  it  went  on  to  declare 
that  they  should  l)e  enrolled  in  Latin. 

Rise  of  Modern  English  Literature. — While 
this  steady  rise  in  the  use  and  estimation  of  the  popular 
speech  was,  in  its  origin,  mainly  due  to  the  loss  of  the 
Enghsh  possessions  on  the  Continent,  two  other  causes 
now  came  in  to  still  further  accelerate  a  movement 
which  political  changes  had  begun.  One  of  these  was 
the  creation  of  a  native  literature  of  a  character  which 
contributed  of  itself  to  give  respect  and  dignity  to  the 
tongue  in  which  it  was  written.  The  second  was  the  va- 
riation, steadily  widening,  which  showed  itself  between 
the  French  spoken  I'n  the  Island  and  the  French 
spoken  on  the  Continent ;  and  this,  from  the  very 
nature  of  things,  could  not  but  react  upon  the  esti- 
mation in  which  the  former  was  held. 

It  was  in  the  fourteenth  century  that  the  forces  which 
give  stability  and  credit  to  a  language  began  first  to 
operate  powerfully  upon  the  speech  employed  by  the 
great  body  of  the  people.     It  was  in  the  latter  half  of 


56  English  Language. 

that  century  that  English  hterature,  in  the  strict  sense 
of  the  word  hterature,  properly  begins.  Numerous 
works  had,  indeed,  been  written  between  the  conquest 
and  this  period  ;  but,  with  the  exception  of  some  few 
specimens  of  lyric  poetry,  there  had  been  nothing 
produced,  which,  looked  at  from  a  purely  literary  point 
of  view,  had  any  reason  to  show  for  its  existence.  If 
known  to  the  cultivated  classes  at  all,  it  was  probably 
treated  with  contempt ;  for  it  was  certainly  contempti- 
ble in  execution,  whatever  it  may  have  been  in  design. 
The  men  who,  during  those  centuries,  wrote  in  English, 
seem  to  have  done  so  in  most  cases  because  they  had 
not  the  knowledge  or  the  ability  to  write  in  Latin  or 
in  French.  To  a  very  large  extent,  their  works  were 
translations.  Compositions  on  dull  subjects,  and  which 
themselves  imparted  additional  dulness  to  the  subjects 
of  which  they  treated,  could  not,  and  as  an  actual 
fact  did  not,  have  any  influence  worth  speaking  of  on 
the  development  of  the  native  speech.  They  are  fre- 
quently of  great  value  to  us  when  looked  at  from 
certain  points  of  view  :  they  are  records  of  new  words 
and  phrases  that  had  come  in,  of  grammatical  changes 
that  had  taken  place,  of  linguistic  influences  of  every 
kind  that  had  been  and  still  were  at  work ;  but  upon 
the  speech  of  the  people  of  that  time  they  exercised 
no  perceptible  influence.  Both  in  language  and  in 
literature  men  imitate  only  what  they  admire  ;  and  the 
works  produced  in  English  for  nearly  three  centuries 
following  the  conquest  could  not,  in  the  vast  majority 
of  instances,  be  admired. 


Rise  of  Mcdcrn  English  Literature,       57 

But  in  the  latter  half  of  the  fourteenth  century  a 
number  of  eminent  writers  in  the  native  speech  arose. 
Sir  John  Mandeville,  after  giving  in  Latin  an  account 
of  his  travels,  and  turning  this  into  French,  translated  it 
again  out  of  French  into  English  about  the  year  1356  ; 
and  the  work  is  entertaining  reading  at  this  day.  A 
few  years  later  Langlande  executed  the  first  version  of 
his  famous  alHterative  poem,  "The  Vision  of  Piers 
Plowman,"  which  was  widely  circulated.  Toward  the 
close  of  the  century,  Gower,  after  composing  works  in 
Latin  and  French,  tried  writing  in  English  also,  at 
the  request,  as  he  tells  us,  of  King  Richard  IL  But 
the  two  great  authors  of  this  time  are  Wycliffe  and 
Chaucer ;  and  their  influence  upon  the  language  can 
not  well  be  over-estimated.  To  the  translation  of  the 
Scriptures,  completed  about  1380  by  the  former  and 
his  disciples,  we  owe  that  peculiar  religious  dialect, 
alike  remarkable  for  simplicity,  for  beauty,  and  for 
force,  which  we  still  see  preserved  in  the  more  modern 
versions  of  the  Bible,  and  which  renders  the  prose  of 
that  work  distinct  from  every  other  existing  form  of 
English  prose.  It  is  only  through  this  translation  that 
Wycliffe  can  be  said  to  have  exerted  a  lasting  influ- 
ence upon  our  tongue.  But  what  he  did  for  the  lan- 
guage of  religion,  Chaucer  did  for  the  language  of 
literature.  In  his  works  men  for  the  first  time  had 
great  models  in  the  native  speecii ;  and  the  dialect  in 
which  he  wrote  became  the  one  universally  employed 
in  literature,  largely  in  consequence  of  his  writing  in 
it.     His  genius  it  was  that  gave  dignity  to  the  speech 


58  English  Language, 

in  which  it  found  manifestation.  But  in  nothing  is  his 
foresight  and  wisdom  more  conspicuous  than  in  the 
fact  that  he  was  the  first  man  of  learning  to  perceive 
tlie  resources  of  the  Enghsh  language  and  tlie  im- 
propriety and  gross  folly  of  Englishmen  writing  in  any 
other.  He  was,  for  his  time,  a  great  scholar ;  and  his 
choice  of  his  native  tongue  was  not,  like  Wycliffe's, 
dictated  by  a  desire  to  reach  and  affect  through  it  all 
classes  in  the  community,  but  by  a  profound  con- 
fidence, not  only  in  the  power  of  expression  it  pos- 
sessed, but  in  the  future  that  lay  before  it.  Nor  was 
the  authority  of  his  name  and  example  in  this  respect 
unnecessary.  He  died  in  1400;  and,  for  more  than 
a  century  after  his  death,  it  was  still  a  venturesome 
undertaking  for  an  Englishman  to  write  in  English  if 
he  could  write  in  Latin.  A  hundred  and  fifty  years 
later,  Roger  Ascham,  one  of  the  greatest  scholars  of 
his  age,  wrote  a  book  entitled*  "Toxophilus,"  first 
published  in  1545.  In  his  dedication  of  the  work  to 
the  gentlemen  and  yeomen  of  his  native  land,  he  felt 
it  necessary  to  apologize  for  having  written  it  in  the 
native  speech.  ''  If  any  man  would  blame  me,"  said 
he,  "  either  for  taking  such  a  matter  in  hand,  or  else 
for  writing  it  in  the  English  tongue,  this  answer  I  may 
make  him  :  that,  what  the  best  of  the  realm  think  it 
honest  for  them  to  use,  I,  one  of  the  meanest  sort,  ought 
not  to  suppose  it  vile  for  me  to  write.  And  though  to 
have  written  it  in  another  tongue  had  been  both  more 
profitable  for  my  study,  and  also  more  honest  for  my 
name,  yet  I  can  think  my  labor  well  bestowed,  if  with 


Debasement  of  Anglo-Norman  French,     59 

a  little  hinderance  of  my  profit  and  my  name,  may 
come  any  furtherance  to  the  pleasure  or  commodity 
of  the  gentlemen  and  yeomen  of  England,  for  whose 
sake  I  took  this  matter  in  hand."  And  again,  in  his 
dedication  to  the  king,  Henry  VIII.,  he  says  that  it 
would  have  been  easier,  and  fitter  for  his  profession, 
to  have  written  the  book  in  Latin  or  in  Greek.  This 
is  by  no  means  an  extreme  case.  In  1623,  seven 
years  after  the  death  of  Shakspeare,  Bacon  spent  no 
small  part  of  his  time  in  turning  his  books,  originally 
written  in  English,  into  Latin,  with  the  avowed  object 
of  saving  them  for  posterity ;  and  in  the  dedication  of 
the  third  edition  of  his  Essays  to  the  Duke  of  Bucking- 
ham, written  in  1625,  he  says,  "I  do  conceive  that 
the  Latin  volume  of  them  (being  in  the  universal 
language)  may  last  as  long  as  books  last."  The  im- 
mense incapacity  of  an  author  of  the  seventeenth 
century,  and  that  author  Bacon,  to  comprehend  the 
future  of  his  native  tongue,  is,  perhaps,  the  highest 
tribute  that  can  be  paid  to  that  great  author  of  the 
fourteenth  century  who  deliberately  trusted  his  reputa- 
tion entirely  to  it. 

Debasement  of  Anglo-Norman  French. — 
The  second  cause  for  the  preference  of  English  to 
French,  which  showed  itself  more  and  more  during 
the  fourteenth  century,  was  a  direct  result  of  the  loss 
of  Normandy.  At  the  time  of  the  conquest,  and  for 
a  long  period  following,  there  was  no  one  tongue  in 
Northern  France  recognized  by  all  as  the  classic 
Frcn  :h  language ;  but  there  were  four  great  dialects 


6o  English  Language. 

of  it,  corresponding  to  four  great  political  divisions, 
each  with  a  literature  of  its  own.  One  of  these  was 
the  speech  of  Normandy,  and  this  it  was  that  in  the 
eleventh  century  was  carried  over  into  England.  But, 
during  the  centuries  following,  the  power  of  the  French 
royal  house  was  steadily  rising,  and  that  of  its  great 
feudal  dependents  was  as  steadily  falling.  The  dialect 
it  employed  was  the  dialect  of  its  ancestral  dominions, 
the  Isle  of  France,  in  which  Paris  is  situated ;  and, 
as  it  slowly  extended  its  authority  over  the  neighboring 
districts,  it  extended  along  with  it  the  use  of  its  own 
form  of  speech.  As  the  French  of  Paris  spread  over 
the  country,  the  tongues  of  the  provinces,  which  had 
once  been  used  in  literature,  sank  gradually  from  the 
condition  of  dialects  to  that  of  patois.  This  was  what 
took  place  in  Normandy  after  its  loss  by  the  English 
crown.  But,  bad  as  the  speech  of  Normandy  might 
come  to  appear  as  compared  with  that  of  Paris,  ii 
would  naturally  seem  far  worse  with  that  dialect  after 
it  had  been  transported  to  England,  and  cut  off  from 
direct  communication  with  the  same  dialect  on  the 
Continent.  Diverging  more  and  more,  as  time  went 
on,  not  merely  fronj  the  speech  of  Paris,  but  even  from 
the  provincial  speech  of  Normandy  itself,  it  was,  in 
consequence,  subjected  to  a  double  degradation  as  the 
patQis  oi  2,  patois.  This  process  of  debasement  began 
to  show  itself  early,  though  doubtless  at  first  only 
here  and  there.  Walter  Map,  a  v/riter  of  the  twelfth 
century,  tells  us  that  at  Marlborough  there  was  reported 
to  be  a  spring,  of  wh.'ch  he  who  tasted  was  sure  to 


Debasement  of  Anglo-Norman  French.     6l 

speak  French  afterward  in  a  barbarous  manner ;  so 
that  from  that  time  he  who  spoke  that  laiigiiage  incor- 
rectly and  inelegantly  was  said  to  speak  French  of 
Marlborough.  Divergences  naturally  went  on  increas- 
ing during  the  two  centuries  following ;  and,  while  the 
French  taught  everywhere  in  the  English  schools 
would  be  certain  to  have  a  pretty  uniform  character, 
it  was  equally  certain  to  deviate  further  and  further 
from  the  French  which  had  come  to  the  front  as  the 
classic  form  of  the  language.  Langlande  refers  con- 
temptuously to  the  "  French  of  Norfolk ;  "  and  Chau- 
cer, in  the  Prologue  to  "The  Canterbury  Tales," 
introduces  the  prioress,  who,  as  a  fashionable  woman, 
felt  it  incumbent  to  speak  French,  but  was  unable  to 
speak  what  had  then  come  to  be  regarded  as  pure 
French.     He  says,  — 

And  Frensch  sche  spak  ful  faire  and  fetysly, 
After  the  scole  of  Stratford  atte  Bowe, 
For  Frensch  of  Parys  was  to  hire  unknovve. 

In  the  Prologue  to  "  The  Testament  of  Love,"  written 
by  a  contemporary  of  Chaucer,  and  long  imputed  to 
him,  there  occurs  a  sentence  which  marks  plainly  the 
contemptuous  opinion  entertained  by  the  French 
themselves  of  the  debased  Anglo-Norman  dialect 
found  in  England.  "In  Latin  and  French,"  said  the 
author,  "hath  many  sovereign  wits  had  great  delight 
to  endite,  and  have  many  noble  things  fulfilled ;  but 
certes  there  be  some  that  speak  their  poesy  matter  in 
French,  of  which  speech  the  Frenchmen  have  as 
good  a  fantasy  as  we  have  in  hearing  of  Frenchmen's 
Enghsh." 


62  English  Language. 

General  Adoption  of  English  by  all  Classes. 

—  All  these  agencies  co-operated  in  bringing  about  the 
adoption  of  the  native  speech  by  all  classes ;  yet  at 
the  end  of  the  fourteenth  centuiy/  while  the  success 
of  English  was  well  assured,  its  victory  was  even  then 
far  from  complete.  As  was  not  unnatural,  French, 
after  it  ceased  to  be  necessary,  came  to  be  fashionable  ; 
and  its  use  long  survived  its  usefulness.  It  continued 
to  be  also,  to  a  great  extent,  the  language  of  official 
documents.  Nearly  all  the  letters  of  Henry  IV.,  who 
reigned  from  1399  to  14 13,  are  written  in  it  or  in 
Latin ;  and  indeed,  in  the  early  part  of  his  reign,  it 
almost  seems  as  if  it  were  not  considered  respectful  to 
address  him  in  English.  A  letter  of  the  Scottish  Earl 
of  March,  dated  Feb.  18,  1400,  offering  his  seiTices 
to  the  English  monarch,  and  entreating  his  support, 
contains  an  apology  at  the  close  for  being  wTitten  in 
the  English  language.  "  And,  noble  prince,"  says  the 
earl,  "mervaile  yhe  nocht  that  I  write  my  lettres  in 
Englishe,  fore  that  ys  mare  clere  to  myne  understand- 
yng  than  Latyne  or  Fraunche." 

But,  during  the  whole  reign  of  Henry  IV.  and  his 
successor  Henry  V.  (141 3- 1422),  the  marks  of  grow- 
ing unfamiliarity  with  French  rapidly  accumulate.  One 
of  the  most  striking  instances  of  this  is  to  be  found, 
indeed,  in  the  very  earliest  part  of  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury, in  the  case  of  the  negotiations  that  took  place  in 
1404,  between  France  and  England,  in  regard  to  the 
outrages  committed  by  each  nation  at  sea.  Three  of 
the  ambassadors  on  the  part  of  the  latter  power  were 


Disuse  of  French  i?t  Englaiid.  63 

Thomas  Swynborn  and  John  Crofft,  knights,  and 
Nicholas  de  Rysshetoun,  a  professor  of  both  the  civil 
and  the  canon  law.  In  a  letter  of  Swynford  and  De 
Eysshetoun  to  the  French  jCouncil,  dated  Sept.  i, 
1404,  they  beg  that  the  answer  may  be  returned  to 
them  in  Latin,  and  not  in  French,  for  the  reason,  as 
appears  subsequently,  that  with  the  latter  they  were 
unacquainted.  Again  :  in  a  letter  of  the  3d  of  Octo 
ber  to  the  Ducness  of  Burgundy,  Swynborn,  Crofft, 
and  De  Rysshetoun  state,  that  although  the  treaties 
between  England  and  France  had  been  wont  to  be 
drawn  up  in  French  by  the  consent  of  the  temporal 
princes  concerned  in  them,  who  did  not  understand 
Latin  as  well  as  French,  yet  all  the  letters  missive  that 
had  passed  between  the  contracting  parties  had  been 
written  in  the  former  tongue,  as  being  the  common 
and  vulgar  idiom  ;  and  this  custom  they  desire  to  have 
continued,  for  reasons  that  further  on  are  distinctly 
given.  For  on  the  21st  of  October,  in  acknowledg- 
ing the  reception  of '  a  communication  from  the  French 
ambassadors,  they  complain  of  its  being  written  in 
French,  and  state,  tliat,  for  men  unlearned  as  they 
were,  it  might  as  well  have  been  put  into  Hebrew.  It 
is  a  most  striking  proof  of  the  general  ignorance  of 
French  that  had  come  to  prevail  in  England,  that 
ambassadors  selected  to  carry  on  delicate  and  difficult 
negotiations,  one  of  whom  was  a  scholar  by  profession, 
should  have  been  utterly  unacquainted  with  the  lan- 
guage of  the  people  with  which  terms  of  settlement 
were  to  be  made,  —  a  language,  moreover,  which  waa 


64  English  Language. 

still  largely  used  in  official  documents  in  their  own 
country.  This  ignorance  kept  on  steadily  increasing 
among  all  classes ;  and  a  necessary  result  was  to  sub- 
stitute the  native  for  the  foreign  speech  in  all  the  trans- 
actions of  life,  including,  what  is  always  the  last  to  be 
changed,  prescribed  forms.  It  was  sometimes  the 
case  that  the  higher  orders  changed  their  methods  far 
sooner  than  those  inferior  to  them  in  position.  It  was 
in  the  first  half  of  the  fifteenth  century  that  many  of 
the  London  guilds  began  to  have  their  regulations 
translated  from  French  into  English,  and  to  use  the 
latter  tongue  in  keeping  their  books.  A  curious  entry 
in  the  records  of  the  Company  of  Brewers,  not  only 
asserts  directly  that  the  greater  part  of  the  Lords  and 
Commons  were  in  the  habit  of  having  the  proceedings 
in  which  they  w^re  concerned  written  down  in  the 
native  language,  but  it  moreover  seems  to  say  that 
direct  influence  was  exercised  by  King  Henry  V.  to 
substitute  the  use  of  English  for  French.  Of  the 
entry,  which  is  in  Latin,  the  following  is  a  translation ; 
"  Whereas,  Our  mother-tongue,  to  wit,  the  English 
tongue,  hath  in  modern  days  begun  to  be  honorably 
enlarged  and  adorned  :  for  that  our  most  excellent 
lord,  King  Henry  the  Fifth,  hath,  in  his  letters  missive, 
and  divers  affairs  touching  his  own  person,  more  will- 
ingly chosen  to  declare  the  secrets  of  his  will-;  and, 
for  the  better  understanding  of  his  people,  hath,  with 
a  diligent  mind,  procured  the  common  idiom  (setting 
aside  others)  to  be  commended  by  the  exercise  of 
writing ;   and  there  are  many  of  our  craft  of  brewers 


Disuse  of  Fi'ench  in  England.  65 

who  have  the  knowledge  of  writing  and  reading  in  the 
said  Enghsh  idiom ;  but  in  others,  to  wit,  the  Latin 
and  French,  before  these  times  used,  they  do  not  in 
any  wise  understand ;  for  which  causes,  with  many 
others,  it  being  considered  how  that  the  greater  part 
of  the  Lords  and  trusty  Commons  have  begun  to  make 
their  matters  to  be  noted  down  in  our  mother-tongue, 
we  also  in  our  craft,  following  in  some  manner  their 
steps,  have  decreed  in  future  so  to  commit  to  memory 
the  needful  things  which  concern  us." 

At  last,  towards  the  close  of  the  fifteenth  century, 
the  laws  enacted  by  Parliament  were  for  the  first  time 
expressed  in  English.  They  had,  after  the  conquest, 
usually  been  pubhshed  in  the  Latin  ;  but  in  the  reign 
of  the  first  Edward  (12 72-1307),  at  the  very  time  the 
French  was  beginning  to  lose  its  hold  upon  the  na- 
tion, it  was  introduced  into  the  statutes.  In  these  it 
gradually  supplanted  the  Latin,  and  by  the  end  of  the 
fourteenth  century  that  tongue  was  no  longer  used  in 
legislative  enactments.  At  the  end  of  the  fifteenth 
century,  French,  in  turn,  had  given  way  to  the  English, 
and  the  triumph  of  the  popular  speech  was  complete. 


CHAPTER    V. 

PERIODS  IN  THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH 
LANGUAGE,  AND  THE  CHANGES  WROUGHT 
IN   IT   BY   THE   NORMAN   CONQUEST.       \ 

What  was  this  popular  speech,  which,  at  the  end  of 
the  fourteenth  century,  was  for  the  first  time  manifest- 
ing its  capabihty  of  becoming  the  vehicle  of  a  great 
literature?  It  was  certainly  not  the  Anglo-Saxon. 
Between  that  and  it  had  taken  place  a  divergence 
even  more  profound  and  wide-reaching  than  that  which 
marks  the  separation  of  French  from  its  parent  Latin. 
The  tongue  spoken  or  written  by  an  Englishman  of 
the  tenth  century  would  have  been  as  unintelligible 
to  an  Englishman  of  the  fourteenth  as  it  is  to  an 
Englishman  of  the  nineteenth.  In  the  course  of 
those  four  hundred  years  the  language  had  not  simply 
suffered  modification,  or  undergone  development,  it 
had  experienced  revolution.  Nor  was  this  popular 
tongue  precisely  that  which  is  found  in  the  literature 
of  to-day ;  though  the  differences  between  it  and  our 
present  speech  are  differences  of  degree,  and  not  of 

66 


England  before  the  Co^qtiesi.         '^  "67" 

kind ;  or,  to  make  use  of  the  same  form  of  statement 
already  employed,  they  are  differences  that  have  arisen 
from  modification  and  development,  and  not  at  all 
from  revolution.  To  bring  out  the  general  nature  of 
the  divergence  in  grammar  and  vocabulary  that  came 
into  being  between  the  English  of  the  tenth  and 
eleventh  centuries  and  that  of  the  fourteenth  will  be 
the  aim  of  the  present  chapter. 

The  Language  before  the  Conquest. — Up  to 
the  Norman  conquest  the  linguistic  situation  may  be 
thus  described  :  A  Low-Germanic  tongue,  usually  called 
by  those  who  spoke  it  Englisc,  or  English,  but  which 
by  us  is  usually  styled  Anglo-Saxon,  was  the  speech' 
of  all  the  Teutonic  inhabitants  of  Great  Britain  from 
the  Channel  to  the  Frith  of  Forth.  In  it  there  existed 
several  dialects ;  but  one  of  these,  the  West-Saxon, 
had  become  the  language  of  law  and  of  literature,  — 
the  language  in  which  the  educated  classes  talked  and 
wrote.  Into  this  language  there  had  been  introduced 
in  the  course  of  centuries  a  slight  number  of  Celtic 
and  of  Norse  words,  a  much  larger  number  of  Latin 
ones.  But,  notwithstanding  these  additions,  it  con- 
tinued to  be  —  what  it  had  been,  not  merely  as  regards 
grammar,  but  also  as  regards  vocabulary  —  essentially 
a  Teutonic  tongue. 

The  Language  after  the  Conquest.  — With 
the  introduction  of  Norman- French,  this  state  of 
affairs  underwent  a  change.  It  was  not  that  the 
Anglo-Saxon  ceased  to  be  a  spoken  tongue,  or  even  a 
written  one  j  but  it  did  cease  to  be  a  cultivated  one. 


6S  English  Language. 

One  result  of  this  was,  that  the  West-Saxon  dialect 
sank  speedily  from  its  posidon  of  supremacy,  and  in 
process  of  time  fell  to  the  level  of  the  other  dialects 
which  it  had  itself  supplanted.  The  inevitable  effect 
was,  that  the  popular  speech  was  left  to  run  its  own 
course,  without  any  restraining  influence  whatever. 
^Each  district  had  v^ords  and  forms,  and  syntactical 
constructions,  and  methods  of  pronunciation,  of  its 
own,  which  were  little  known  or  used  outside  of  its 
borders.  All  was  in  confusion ;  and  changes  neces- 
sarily took  place  rapidly.  This  was  something  that  is 
always  sure  to  occur  when  a  cultivated  tongue  comes 
to  be  used  exclusively  by  the  uneducated  or  the  par- 
tially educated ;  for  it  is  a  speedy  result  that  no 
standard  of  authority  exists  anywhere  in  it,  which  is 
felt  to  be  binding  upon  all.  The  influence  of  the  old 
hterature  is  gone  ;  and  as  yet  no  great  authors  have 
risen  to  establish  methods  of  expression  to  which  the 
speech  of  the  better  class  will  be  made  to  conform. 
There  are  in  it  but  few  books  written,  and  there  are 
but  few  persons  to  read  those  that  are  written. 
Learned  almost  wholly  by  the  ear,  and  scarcely  at  all 
by  the  eye,  the  language  is  specially  subject  to  the 
phonetic  and  linguistic  changes  of  all  kinds  that  rude 
and  ignorant  men  may  bring  about  by  modifying  pro- 
nunciation, by  confo  inding  declensions  and  conjuga- 
tions, by  disregarding  syntactical  laws,  in  short,  by  all 
the  numerous  processes  of  decay  and  regeneration  to 
which  a  living  tongue  is  subject  by  the  very  fact  of  its 
being  a  living  tongue.     To   all  these   influences  the 


English  after  the  Cojtquest.  6g 

:ialive  speech  was  exposed,  with  httle  check,  after  the 
'.onqnest;  and  it  at  once  entered,  in  consequence, 
ipon  a  series  of  rapid  and  violent  changes. 
"These  changes  were  of  several  kinds;  but  there 
A^ere  two  principal  ones.  One  of  them  was  the  loss 
of  inflections  in  the  native  speech ;  the  other,  the 
introduction  into  it  of  French  words.  The  latter  is  a 
direct  result  of  the  conquest ;  the  former,  only  an 
indirect  one.  For,  even  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  period, 
the  process  of  stripping  the  speech  of  its  inflection 
had  already  begun  to  show  itself  to  a  slight  extent ; 
and  it  has  taken  place  on  a  large  scale  in  the  case  of 
other  Teutonic  peoples,  whose  languages  have  been 
subject  to  none  of  the  influences  that  follow  subju- 
gation by  a  foreign  race  speaking  a  foreign  tongue. 
What  the  introduction  of  the  Norman-French  into 
England,  and  its  use  there  by  the  higher  classes, 
did,  was  to  abolish  any  standard  of  authority  for  the 
native  speech.  It  was  thereby  speedily  thrown  into  a 
chaotic  condition ;  all  orderly  development  was  pre- 
vented ;  the  abandonment  of  inflection,  which  to  some 
extent  was  certain  to  come  some  time,  was  rapidly 
hastened.  Moreover,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that 
an  additional  result  was  the  giving  up  of  inflections 
on  a  scale  that  would  never  have  taken  place  had  the 
language  been  left  subject  only  to  the  influences  that 
could  have  affected  it  in  a  country  largely  cut  off  by 
its  position  fi:om  contact  with  foreign  nationsi  These 
are  indirect  consequences  only;  but  they  were  the 


70  Eiiglish  Langtiage, 

first  to  exhibit  themselves,  and  are  therefore  the  first 
to  demand  our  attention. 

The  changes,  indeed,  that  took  place,  as  a  result  of 
the  conquest,  directly  in  the  inflectional  system,  and 
indirectly  in  the  vocabulary,  of  the  English  tongue, 
were  so  numerous  and  great  that  it  has  been  customary 
to  give  the  language  during  several  centuries  different 
names.  It  is  of  itself  a  convincing  proof  of  the  con- 
fused and  varying  character  of  our  early  speech,  that 
scarcely  any  two  scholars  have  agreed  upon  the  titles 
or  dates  of  the  periods  which  they  have  adopted. 
This  is  not  at  all  to  be  wondered  at.  Scientific  pre- 
cision in  such  respects  is  not  attainable  in  even  the 
most  cultivated  and  stable  tongues.  Dates  in  the  his- 
tory of  a  language  are  convenient  for  reference  :  they 
are  worth,  nothing  for  accuracy  of  statement.  Men 
do  not  use  one  form  of  speech  one  year,  and  a  differ- 
ent form  the  following  year.  This,  which  is  true  of  any 
tongue,  no  matter  how  marked  the  changes,  is  espe- 
cially true  of  the  earlier  stages  of  our  own,  in  which  the 
changes  were  not  merely  rapid,  but  in  which  they  were 
unequal  in  different  parts  of  the  country.  The  lan- 
guage of  the  north  of  England  advanced  much  more 
quickly  toward  Modern  English  than  the  language  of 
the  south ;  and  a  statement,  in  consequence,  which 
would  be  true  of  the  one,  might  be  grossly  false  of  the 
other. 

Periods  of  the  English  Language.  —  It  is, 
accordingly,  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  titles  and 
dates  about  to  be  given  are  in  themselves  of  no  au- 


Periods  of  English,  ji 

thority,  and  are  used  mainly  as  a  matter  of  conven- 
ience ;  that  the  same  terms,  when  employed  by  others, 
may  not  and  often  do  not  mean  the  same  things  ;  that 
other  divisions,  and  an  entirely  different  nomenclature, 
will  be  found  in  other  works  treating  upon  this  same 
subject.  With  this  understanding  it  is  only  necessary 
to  add  that  the  following  will  be  the  names  and  limits 
of  the  periods  into  which,  in  this  volume,  English  is 
divided. 

I.  The  Anglo-Saxon  period  will  embrace  that  form 
of  the  language  spoken  from  the  first  coming  of  the 
Saxons  and  Angles  —  that  is,  from  the  middle  of  the 
fifth  century  —  to  the  middle  of  the  century  following 
the  Norman  conquest,  —  that  is,  to  the  year  1150. 

II.  The  Early  English  period  will  embrace  the  form 
of  the  language  spoken  between  1150  and  1350. 
When  a  further  subdivision  of  this  is  rendered  desirable, 
the  first  half  of  it,  the  century  from  1150  to  1250, 
will  be  spoken  of  as  the  Semi-Saxon,  or  Late  Anglo- 
Saxon  :  the  second  half  of  it,  the  century  from  1250 
to  1350,  will  be  called  the  Old  English. 

III.  Middle  English  will  include  the  form  of  the 
language  used  between  1350  and  1550. 

IV.  Modern  English  will  be  the  name  given  to  the 
language  as  spoken  from  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth 
century  to  the  present  time. 

The  following  schedule  represents,  accordingly,  the 
nomenclature  of  the  periods,  with  their  limits,  as  em- 
ployed in  this  volume  :  — 


72  English  Laftguage. 


I.  Anglo-Saxon 450-115^ 

Semi-Saxon,  or 


II.   \ 


Late  Anglo-Saxon 
Old  English 


.  1150-1250 

^  Early  English    .         .     11 50-1 350 

.  1250-1350 

III.  Middle  English i350-i55<3 

IV,  Modern  English 1550- 


Literature  of  the  Early  English  Period. — 
Of  the  literature  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  period,  a  slight 
account  has  already  been  given.  In  the  Early  English 
period  there  were  composed  a  large  number  of  works, 
many  of  which  still  exist  only  in  mamiscrii)t.  To  a 
great  extent  they  are  translations  from  the  French,  or 
a  working-over  of  French  productions.  As  regards 
their  subject-matter,  they  may  be  divided  into  the  fol- 
lowing classes  :  i .  Religious  works,  including  legends 
of  saints  and  martyrs.  These  may  be  said  to  begin 
with  the  Ormulum  (life  of  Christ,  made  up  from  the 
Gospels,  by  an  Augustinian  monk  named  Ormin  or 
Orm),  Hali  Meidenhad  (Holy  Maidenhood),  and  the 
Ancren  Riwle  (Rule  of  Anchorites) .  All  of  these  be- 
long to  the  Semi-Saxon  period.  Later  there  are  series 
of  homilies  and  homiletic  treatises,  both  in  prose  and 
verse.  In  the  Old  English  period  may  be  mentioned, 
as  among  the  most  important  works,  Dan  Michel's 
"  Ayenbite  of  Inwit  "  (Remorse  of  Conscience),  in  the 
Kentish  dialect,  the  "  Handlyng  Synne "  by  Robert 
of  Brunne,  "  The  Pricke  of  Conscience  "  by  Richard 
RoUe  de  Hampole,  and  versions  of  the  histories,  or 
parts  of  histories,  contained   in   the   Bible,  such   as 


Early  English  Literature.  73 

'^  Genesis  and  Exodus,"  and  the  "  Cursor  Mundi,"  an 
account  of  the  world  founded  upon  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  with  legends  interspersed  drawn  from  every 
quarter.  To  this  list,  imperfect  as  it  is,  may  be  added 
a  large  number  of  lives  of  saints  and  martyrs,  both  in 
the  Semi-Saxon  and  Old  Enghsh  periods.  2.  Romances 
and  legendary  history.  These  may  be  said  to  begin 
with  the  "Brut,"  a  poem  composed  by  Layamon,  a 
Worcestershire  priest,  which  gives  an  account  of  the 
legendary  history  of  Britain  from  its  occupation  by  a 
mythical  Brutus  (a  great-grandson  of  ^neas)  and  his 
Trojan  followers,  down  to  its  partial  conquest  by  the 
Saxons.  Among  the  metrical  romances  of  the  Early 
English  period,  "King  Horn,"  "  Havelok  the  Dane," 
several  legendary  poems  founded  upon  the  life  of 
Alexander  the  Great,  and  varying  widely  from  real  his- 
tory, may  be  regarded  as  representative  specimens. 
3.  Histories,  partly  fabulous,  it  is  true,  but  not  so 
deemed  by  their  authors.  These  belong  to  the  Old 
English  period  exclusively,  and  consist  of  works  in 
verse  by  Robert  of  Gloucester  and  by  Robert  Man- 
ning of  Brunne.  The  latter  is  a  translation  from  the 
'  French  of  Pierre  de  Langtoft.  Both  of  these  treat  of 
tlie  history  of  Britain  from  the  legendary  coming  of 
Brutus  to  a  period  near  their  own  time ;  the  former 
ending  with  the  accession  of  Edward  I.  in  1272  ;  the 
latter,  with  his  death  in  1307.  4.  Shorter  poems, 
some  of  which  are  of  a  satirical  nature,  but  most  of 
them  purely  lyrical.  The  most  conspicuous  among 
these  are  "The  Land  of  Cokaygne,"  the  "Ule  and 


74  English  Language. 

Nihtegale  "  (the  Owl  and  Nightingale) ,  and  a  series  of 
lyric  poems  of  a  political,  devotional,  or  social  nature. 
The  works  in  all  these  classes  are  of  the  highest  value 
to  the  student  of  the  language ;  but  it  is  only  those 
of  the  last  class  that  have  any  claim  whatever  to  literary 
excellence,  and  these  are  comparatively  few  in  number. 

One  feature  worthy  of  mention,  that  characterizes 
the  Early  English  period,  is  the  tendency  to  abandon 
alliteration,  and  substitute  for  it  final  rhyme.  In 
Anglo-Saxon  verse  instances  of  rhyme  are  only  occa- 
sional, and  probably  often  purely  accidental :  at  any 
rate,  it  is  only  in  a  piece  of  eighty  Imes  that  it  is 
deliberately  employed  throughout,  and  in  that  it  is 
mixed  with  alliteration,  with  the  result  that  no  modern 
scholar  has  been  successful  in  getting  any  coherent 
meaning  out  of  the  poem,  or  rather  of  putting  any  into 
it.  Alliterative  verse  did  not  die  out  till  the  sixteenth 
century ;  but  the  only  conspicuous  work  composed  in 
it,  "The  Vision  of  Piers  Plowman,"  belongs  to  the 
fourteenth.  Its  inferiority,  indeed,  to  rhyme  as  an 
instrument  of  expression,  led  to  its  abandonment  by 
all  the  Teutonic  nations  at  comparatively  early  periods 
in  their  literary  history. 

Changes  in  Grammar  between  Anglo-Saxon 
and  Middle  English. — A  more  detailed  account 
of  the  changes  that  took  place  in  the  grammatical 
structure  after  the  conquest  will  be  found  in  another 
place :  here  only  a  slight  summary  can  be  given. 
Comparisons  can  necessarily  be  made  only  between 
periods  which  have  a  standard  literature  of  their  own, 


Grammatical  Changes  in  Early  English.    75 

not  exhibiting  the  pecuharities  of  individual  writers, 
but  the  universal  characteristics  of  the  cultivated 
speech.  In  this  particular  case  the  comparison  must 
be  made,  accordingly,  between  the  literary  West-Saxon 
and  that  dialect  of  English  which  was  employed  by 
the  great  writers  of  the  fourteenth  century,  and  by 
them  made  the  language  of  all  our  literature.  Of 
these,  Chaucer,  as  the  greatest  of  all,  may  be  taken 
as  the  representative  of  the  rest.  It  is,  however,  to  be 
borne  in  mind  that  whatever  may  be  the  limits  fixed 
upon  for  the  periods  in  the  history  of  any  tongue, 
assertions  made  in  regard  to  them  can  only  be  true 
generally :  they  are  always  subject  to  specific  excep- 
tions. For  illustration,  its,  as  the  genitive  of  the 
neuter  pronoun  of  the  third  person,  is  a  characteristic 
of  Modern  English  as  contrasted  with  the  earlier 
speech  in  which  his  was  the  form  employed.  Yet, 
while  this  is  true  generally,  it  is  so  far  from  being  true 
specifically,  that  his  can  be  found  where  we  should 
now  use  its,  for  a  hundred  years  after  the  Modern 
English  period  begins. 

Let  us  begin,  then,  with  the  modifications  which  the 
inflectional  system  underwent.  These  are  first  brought 
to  our  knowledge  by  certain  orthographical  changes 
which  took  place  in  consequence  of  a  change  in  pro- 
nunciation. Two  of  them  are  of  special  importance. 
One  is  of  the  weakening  into  e  of  the  vowels  a,  0,  and 
u  of  the  terminations.  Thus,  in  Anglo-Saxon,  -an  is 
the  regular  ending  of  the  infinitive :  it  was  soon 
after  the  conquest  weakened  into  -en,     'To  tell,'  in 


76  English  Language. 

the  eleventh  century  was  tellan :  in  the  twelfth  cen 
tury  it  became  tellen.  So,  in  like  manner,  oxa,  '  ox, 
became  oxe ;  oxan,  'oxen,'  became  oxen;  stdnaSy 
*  stones,'  and  s tolas,  'stools,'  became  stanes  and  stoles; 
deim,  '  den,'  became  dejte.  This  was  a  change  that 
was  certain  to  happen  in  English,  as  in  the  other  Teu- 
tonic languages,  had  the  Norman-French  never  set 
foot  in  Britain.  All  the  effect  produced  by  their 
coming  was  to  hasten  its  general  adoption ;  and 
during  the  twelfth  century  it  did  become  generally 
established.  The  second  change  was  the  dropping 
of  the  final  7t,  —  a  peculiarity  which  the  Northum- 
brian dialect,  as  has  been  seen  (p.  37),  exhibited  at 
an  early  day.  This,  however,  was  much  slower  of 
general  adoption  than  the  weakening  of  the  vowels  a, 
o,  and  u;  but,  as  it  continued  to  extend  itself  more 
and  more,  the  result  of  the  two  changes  working 
together  was  to  make  the  final  e  the  one  termination 
of  the  Middle  English  which  represented  nearly  all 
the  terminations  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  that  had  been 
preserved  at  all ;  so  that  in  the  study  of  this  one  end- 
ing is  involved  the  study  of  nearly  the  whole  gram- 
matical inflection  of  that  period.  It  was,  moreover, 
largely  due  to  the  steady  reduction  of  all  terminations 
to  this  single  one,  that  the  confusion  sprang  up  in 
usage,  which,  in  turn,  led,  to  a  great  extent,  to  the 
rejection  of  inflection  altogether.  What  there  was  left 
of  it  in  the  fourteenth  century,  compared  with  Anglo- 
Saxon,  can  be  stated  very  briefly. 

In  the  noun,  the  two  leading  declensions  of  the  An- 


Grammatical  Changes  in  Early  English,    yj 

glo-Saxon  (the  vowel  and  the  consonant,  or  the  strong 
and  the  weak),  with  their  several  subordinate  declen- 
sions, had  been  reduced  to  the  one  inflection  seen  in 
the  masculine  noun  of  the  vowel  declension.  The 
singular,  as  in  Modern  English,  had  a  distinct  form 
only  for  the  genitive  case  ;  the  ending  being  -es.  All 
the  cases  of  the  plural  were  alike ;  the  termination 
being,  as  now,  the  same  as  that  of  the  genitive  singu- 
lar. This  -es  of  the  genitive  singular  and  of  the  plural 
usually  formed  a  distinct  syllable  in  pronunciation,  at 
least  in  monosyllabic  nouns. 

The  adjective,  which  in  Anglo-Saxon  was  very 
rich  in  inflections,  had  been  nearly  stripped  of  them 
altogether.  The  plural  was  generally  distinguished 
from  the  singular  by  the  addition  of  e,  —  a  distinction 
which  necessarily  could  not  be  made  when  the  singu- 
lar itself  ended  in  that  letter.  With  the  disappearance 
of  the  terminations  had  nearly  disappeared,  also,  the 
difference  between  the  two  original  declensions  of  the 
adjective,  —  the  definite  and  the  indefinite;  though  a 
trace  of  the  former  continued  to  manifest  itself  in  the 
addition  of  e  in  certain  cases  to  the  singular. 

The  personal  pronouns  and  the  interrogative  who 
(A.  S.  hwa)  were  somewhat  more  fortunate  in  pre- 
serving their  inflection.  They  retained  a  distinct 
form  for  the  case  which  we  now  call  the  objective  ; 
and  this  was  founded  upon  the  original  dative,  the 
original  accusative  having  been  given  up.  The  dual 
number  of  the  pronouns  of  the  first  and  second  per- 
sons was  entirely  lost.     In  the  case  of  the  pronouns  of 


yS  English  Language. 

the  third  person,  some  of  its  forms  had  been  aban- 
doned, and  their  places  were  suppHed  from  the  origi- 
nal demonstrative  pronoun  now  represented  by  that. 
Pronouns  which  had  inflections  resembling  those  of 
the  adjective  were  stripped  of  them  in  the  same 
manner  as  they. 

In  the  case  of  the  verb,  while  the  distinction 
between  the  two  leading  conjugations  still  continued 
to  exist  as  now,  the  barriers  between  the  subordinate 
conjugations  under  each  had  been  generally  broken 
down.  Again :  the  verbs  of  the  strong  or  old  con- 
jugation—  that  is,  verbs  like  diive,  drove,  which 
add  nothing  to  form  the  preterite,  and  suffer  vowel 
change  —  had  in  vast  numbers  passed  over  to  the 
weak  conjugation,  that  is,  to  verbs  like  light,  lighted, 
which  take  an  additional  syllable  (or  letter)  to 
form  the  preterite.  The  inflections,  to  some  extent, 
were  still  retained;  thus,  for  illustration,  they  tell 
was  they  tellen  or  they  telle.  The  use  of  compound 
verb  phrases,  such  as  /  have  told,  I  shall  tell,  had 
been  vastly  extended;  and  in  particular,  at  this  very 
time,  the  employment  of  do  and  did  with  the  infini- 
tive —  as  in  /  do  give,  I  did  give  —  was  just  beginning 
to  be  adopted  generally. 

A  consideration  of  these  statements  shows  that 
Middle  English  differs  but  slighdy  in  its  grammatical 
structure  from  the  English  of  to-day.  In  fact,  no 
small  proportion  of  the  difficulty  that  the  modem 
reader  at  first  encounters  in  examining  the  literature  of 
this  period  is  due  merely  to  difference  of  orthography. 


Grammatical  Changes  in  Ear-ly  English.    'j(^ 

A  passage  from  Chaucer  in  the  original  spelHng,  and 
in*  modern  speUing  so  far  as  it  can  be  employed,  will 
illustrate  better  than  pages  of  description  the  essential 
likeness,  and  the  extent  of  the  unlikeness,  that  prevail 
between  the  language  of  the  fourteenth  century  and 
that  of  the  nineteenth ;  and  when  compared  with  the- 
specimens  of  the  English  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  period, 
found  on  pp.  25,  27,  28,  will  show  clearly  how  wide 
was  the  chasm  that  separated  the  language  of  the 
fourteenth  century  from  that  of  the  eleventh. 

In  the  modernized  version  of  the  following  passage 
from  "  The  Canterbury  Tales  "  the  pronunciation  of  syl- 
lables no  longer  sounded  is  marked  by  the  sign  ^ ;  the 
accentuation  of  syllables  not  now  accented  is  marked 
by  the  sign  ' ;  while  the  insertion  of  a  hyphen  between 
syllables  shows  that  they  are  all  to  be  pronounced. 

"  In  tholde  dayes  of  the  Kyng  Arthour, 
Of  which  that  Britons  speken  greet  honour, 
All  was  this  land  fulfild  of  fayerie; 
The  elf  queene  with  hir  joly  compaignye, 
Daunced  f ul  ofte  in  many  a  grene  mede ; 
This  was  the  olde  opinion,  as  I  rede. 
I  speke  of  manye  hundred  yeres  ago ; 
But  now  kan  no  man  se  none  elves  mo. 
For  now  the  grete  charitee  and  prayeres 
Of  lymytours  and  othere  hooly  freres, 
That  serchen  every  lond  and  every  streem, 
As  thikke  as  motes  in  the  sonne  beem, 
Blessynge  halles,  chambres,  kichenes,  and  boures 
Citees  and  burghes,  castels  hye  and  toures 
Thropes  and  bernes,  shipnes  and  dayeryes. 
This  maketh  that  ther  been  no  fairyes. 


8o  English  Language. 

For  ther  as  wont  to  walken  was  an  elf, 
Ther  walketh  now  the  lymytour  hym  self. 
In  undermeles  and  in  monvenynges, 
And  seyth  his  matyns  and  his  hooly  thynges 
As  he  gooth  in  his  lymytacioun. 
Wommen  may  go  now  saufly  up  and  doun, 
In  every  bussh  or  under  every  tree ; 
There  is  noon  other  incubus  but  he." 

"  In  th'  olde  daj-es  of  the  King  Arthour, 
Of  which  that  Britons  speaken  great  honour, 
All  was  this  land  fulfilled  of  fa-e-r^^ ; 
The  elf  queen,  with  her  jolly  company, 
JJanced  full  oft  on  many  a  greene  mead ; 
This  was  the  old  opinion,  as  I  read. 
I  speak  of  many  hundred  years  ago  ; 
But  now  can  no  man  see  none  elv^s  mo. 
For  now  the  greate  charity  and  prayeres 
Of  limiters  i  and  other  holy  freres. 
That  searchen  every  land  and  every  stream. 
As  thick  as  motes  in  the  sunne-beam, 
Blessing  halles,  chambers,  kitchenes,  and  bowers, 
Cities  and  boroughs,  castles  high  and  towers, 
Thorpes  -  and  barnes,  shipnes  ^  and  da-i-ries, 
This  maketh  that  there  ben  no  fa-i-ries. 
For  there  as  wont  to  walken  was  an  elf. 
There  walketh  now  the  limiter  himself, 
In  undermeles  *  and  in  morwen^nges,^ 
And  saith  his  matins  and  his  holy  thinges 
As  he  goth  in  his  lim-i-ta-ti-on. 
Women  may  now  go  safely  up  and  down, 
In  every  bush  or  under  every  tree  ; 
There  is  none  other  incubus  but  he." 


'  A  begging  friar,  assigned  a  certain  limit  foi  begging.        2  Villages. 
•  Stables.  *   Afternoons.  ^  Mornings. 


Lexical  Chajigcs  in  Early  English.       8l 

Change  in  the  Vocabulary.  —  Such  is  a  brief 
outline  of  the  changes  that  took  place  in  the  inflec- 
tional system  of  the  English  tongue.  Many  of  them 
would  doubtless  have  happened  had  there  been  no 
Norman  conquest;  but  to  that  event  were  certainly 
due  both  the  rapidity  with  which,  and  the  extent  to 
which,  they  were  carried  out.  But  the  second  great 
change  we  have  to  consider  was  no  indirect  result : 
this  was  the  introduction  of  foreign  words  into  the 
vocabulary,  a  process  which,  in  certain  respects,  has 
transformed  the  character  of  our  speech. 

The  coming  of  the  Normans  into  England  brought 
two  languages  into  close  geographical  connection. 
French  was  the  speech  of  the  higher  classes ;  English, 
that  of  the  great  body  of  the  people  :  yet  for  two  cen- 
turies these  tongues  existed  side  by  side,  without  the 
latter  borrowing  words,  to  any  extent,  from  the  former. 
It  is  not  necessary  to  assume  that  this  state  of  things 
was  due  to  any  hostility  between  the  races,  or  to  the 
disinclination  jon  the  part  of  the  conquered  people  to 
use  the  language  of  their  conquerors.  They  did  not 
employ  any  new  words  because  they  did  not  need 
them  :  the  existing  stock  of  terms  was  amply  sufficient 
to  convey  all  the  knowledge  they  sought  to  impart,  or 
to  express  the  few  new  ideas  to  which  they  gave  birth. 
Certainly  the  fact  of  little  borrowing  cannot  be  dis- 
puted. The  "Brut"  of  Layamon  was  composed  nearly 
a  hundred  and  fifty  years  after  the  conquest :  it  is  a 
poem  containing  thirty-two  thousand  short  lines,  and 
yet  there  are  in  it  hardly  a  hundred  words  of  Norman- 


82  English  Lmtguage. 

French  origin.  The  proportion  is  even  less  in  the 
"  Ormulum,"  —  a  composition  of  about  the  same  date, 
and  containing  nearly  twenty  thousand  short  lines.  The 
number  of  French  words  adopted  into  English  speech 
naturally  became  more  and  more  as  time  went  on  ; 
and  at  every  period  since  its  introduction  it  has  always 
varied  with  the  nature  of  the  subject-matter ;  but,  down 
to  the  end  of  the  thirteenth  century,  the  additions  that 
had  come  from  this  source  to  the  native  speech  formed 
only  a  small  percentage  of  the  whole. 

It  was  in  the  latter  half  of  the  Old  English  period 
—  that  is,  from  1300  to  1350  —  that  a  great  change 
took  place  in  this  respect.  It  was  during  those  years 
that  the  French-speaking  population  of  the  island  may 
be  said  to  have  generally  abandoned  their  original 
tongue,  and  to  have  adopted  that  of  the  mass  of  the 
people.  It  was  natural  that  they  should  bring  into  the 
speech  they  had  made  their  own  many  of  the  words 
most  familiar  to  them,  especially  those  descriptive  of 
their  ways  of  life,  and  expressive  of  thoughts  and 
feelings  peculiar  to  themselves.  This  was,  indeed,  the 
case  to  a  remarkable  extent.  During  the  half-century 
referred  to,  a  vast  multitude  of  words  came  from  the 
French  into  the  English :  what  had  been  left  of  the 
grammatical  inflection  was  Teutonic  ;  but  the  vocabu 
!ary  from  this  time  assumed  that  mixed  character  which 
has  ever  since  been  one  of  its  marked  peculiarities. 
Even  in  the  earliest  writers  of  the  Middle  English 
period,  the  foreign  words  constitute  one-half  of  the 
whole  number  they  employ;  and  the  proportion  hag 


Lexical  Changes  in  Early  English.       83 

remained  essentially  unchanged  from  that  time  to  the 
present.  Such  a  statement  is,  of  course,  based  upon 
the  special  glossary  of  an  author  in  which  a  word  that 
occurs  but  once  in  his  writings  counts  for  as  much  as 
one  that  is  used  by  him  a  thousand  times  ;  not  upon 
the  frequency  of  the  occurrence  of  Teutonic  or  of 
Romance  words  in  particular  pagers. 

This  vast  accession  of  French  words  is  technically 
called  the  ''  Latin  of  the  Third  Period  ; "  but  it  is  widely 
different  in  character  from  any  accession  the  language 
had  previously  received ;  for  it  entered  into  and  modi' 
fied  the  whole  frame-work  of  expression,  and  pro- 
foundly influenced  the  course  which  the  language 
was  to  take  in  reference  to  future  additions  to  its 
vocabulary.  Other  Teutonic  tongues  may  make  use 
of  Romance  words :  the  English  must  make  use  of 
them,  even  in  denouncing  them.  This  is  an  essential 
distinction,  which  may  be  disregarded,  but  cannot  be 
denied;  and  it  had  its  origin  in  that  change  in  the 
nature  of  the  language  which  was  a  direct  result  of 
the  vast  irruption  of  French  terms  in  the  fourteenth 
century.  Has  this  change  been  a  benefit,  or  an  injury? 
This  question  has  given  rise  to  much  controversy,  and 
is,  from  its  nature,  one  that  can  never  be  settled  to  the 
satisfaction  of  all.  In  this  place  it  is  only  important 
to  point  out  the  principal  losses  which  the  speech 
suffered  as  a  consequence  of  the  alteration  in  its 
character. 

Losses  of  Middle  English  as  compared 
with  Anglo-Saxon.  —  Let  us  first  consider  the  loss 


84  English  Language. 

of  native  words.  Language  is  always  economical,  and 
is  not  long  disposed  to  retain  terms  and  expressions 
of  which  it  has  no  real  need.  When,  therefore,  two 
different  words  —  the  one  of  Anglo-Saxon,  the  other  of 
French  origin,  but  both  meaning  precisely  the  same 
thing  —  came  to  exist  side  by  side,  one  of  two  results 
was  almost  certain  to  happen  :  either  both  were  re- 
tained, and  a  distinction  was  made  in  their  signification, 
or  if  no  such  use  could  be  made  of  both,  or,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  was  not  made,  one  of  them  was  almost  certain 
to  be  dropped.  In  a  large  number  of  cases  in  the 
speech  of  the  fourteenth  century,  it  was  the  native 
word  that  was  rejected,  and  the  foreign  one  that  was 
retained.  It  is  probably  an  under  rather  than  an  over 
estimate  to  assert  that  more  than  one-half  of  the 
Anglo-Saxon  vocabulary  has  been  lost  to  Modern  Eng- 
lish; and  the  place  of  it  has  necessarily  been  sup- 
phed,  whether  for  good  or  ill,  by  importations  from 
alien  sources. 

A  second  and  more  serious  blow  to  the  resources  of 
the  language  was  the  loss  of  a  large  number  of  forma- 
tive prefixes  and  suffixes,  by  the  addition  of  the  former 
of  which  the  meaning  of  the  word  was  modified,  and 
by  that  of  the  latter  the  word  itself  was  changed  from 
one  part  of  speech  into  another.  In  these  elements 
the  original  speech  abounded,  and  possessi'd,  in  conse- 
quence, almost  unlimited  power  in  the  creation  of  new 
terms  from  native  roots.  Thus  from  the  Anglo -Saxoii 
fiowan,  '  to  flow,'  seven  new  compounds  were  formed 
by  the  addition  of  various  prefixes,  of  which  seven, 


Loss  of  Fonnative  Affixes.  85 

only  one,  oferfiowan,  'to  overflow,'  survives  with  us. 
In  a  similar  manner,  from  the  verb  sittan,  'to  sii,'  fifteen 
new  verbs  were  formed,  of  which  not  a  single  one  is 
to  be  found  to-day,  though  their  places  are  in  part 
supplied  in  this  case,  as  in  others,  by  joining  separate 
particles  to  the  verb,  forming  such  expressions  as,  sit 
b}\  sit  on.  And,  even  in  some  instances  where  a  prefix 
has  been  retained  in  certain  words,  the  power  of  em- 
ploying it  to  form  new  ones  has  been  given  up.  Thus 
with  is  still  found  in  withdrazv,  withhold,  with- 
stand, but  we  no  longer  think  of  prefixing  it  to  other 
verbs ;  whereas,  originally,  it  could  have  been  com- 
pounded with  almost  any  verb,  and  was  actually  com- 
pounded with  about  thirty.  Again  :  the  Anglo-Saxon 
was  comparatively  rich  in  formative  suffixes,  by  the 
appending  of  which  one  part  of  speech  was  changed 
into  another.  For  illustration  :  In  Modern  English  the 
adding  of  the  suffix  -er  to  the  verb  do  changes  it  into 
the  noun  doer ;  the  adding  of  -ness  to  the  adjective 
black,  changes  it  into  the  noun  blackness ;  the  add- 
ing of  -y  to  the  noun  snow  changes  it  into  the 
adjective  snowy.  Many  of  these  formative  suffixes 
belonging  to  the  ancient  tongue  the  modern  tongue 
has  lost ;  though  here,  to  some  extent,  it  has  supplied 
their  places  by  borrowing  from  the  French,  the  Latin, 
and  the  Greek. 

The  third  loss  was  in  the  power  of  forming  self- 
explaining  compounds.  In  this  respect  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  rivalled  the  modern  German.  Thus  carpenter 
could  with  them  be  expressed  by  trcow-wyrhta,  '  tree- 


S6  English  Language. 

Wright/  or  'worker  in  wood;'  butcher^  by  fl&sc* 
mangere,  'flesh-monger,'  or  'dealer  in  flesh;'  library 
by  bochils,  '  book-house  ; '  and  hundreds  of  illustrations 
could  easily  be  given  of  the  facility  and  freedom  with 
which  men  then  employed  the  power  of  combining 
familiar  words  to  form  new  ones.  Many  of  these 
compounds  went  out  of  use  in  the  fourteenth  century 
in  consequence  of  words  with  an  equivalent  meaning 
having  been  taken  from  the  French.  The  mere  loss 
of  these  was  not  in  itself  so  serious  a  detriment,  how- 
ever, as  the  indisposition,  which  sprang  up  in  conse- 
quence, to  form  or  to  employ  self-explaining  com- 
pounds whose  places  could  be  readily  supplied  by 
borrowing.  This  indisposition,  not  to  say  aversion, 
can  be  plainly  traced  in  the  history  of  the  language 
from  the  beginning  of  the  Middle  English  period  to 
the  present  time.  Thus,  for  illustration,  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  sunnen-stede  appears  in  Early  English,  and 
later  as  sun-steady  that  is,  the  sun's  stopping-place  ; 
and  was  used  to  denote  that  part  of  the  ecliptic  in 
which  the  sun  is  farthest  from  the  equator.  In  lieu  of 
this,  we  now  go  to  the  Latin  solsfitium,  formed  of  two 
words  similar  in  meaning  to  the  corresponding  English 
ones,  and  from  it  derive  the  term  solstice.  By  this 
we  certainly  lose  something  in  picturesqueness  and 
force  of  expression,  though  we  may  possibly  gain  in 
precision.  •  Or  an  illustration  of  a  later  period  can 
be  employed.  A  certain  liquid  substance  exuding  in 
various  ways  from  the  earth  needs  a  name.  Seen 
oozing  from  the   crevices  of  a  rock^   it  is  naturally 


Gains  made  by  English.  87 

called  rock-oil,  a  term,  to  all  appearances,  sufficient- 
ly definite  to  distinguish  it  from  all  other  kinds  of  oil. 
Yet,  instead  of  using  this,  we  go  to  the  Latin  petra, 
*rock,'  and  oleu?n,  'oil,'  and  rock-oil  appears  as 
pcfroleu?fty  —  a  word,  the  meaning  of  which  must  be 
learned  before  it  is  understood.  Processes  like  these 
are  constantly  going  on,  and  in  the  case  of  scientific 
words  they  may  be  considered  necessary ;  for  it  is  of  the 
utmost  importance  that  a  technical  term  should  convey 
to  the  minds  of  all  one  idea,  and  but  one  idea,  —  that 
its  signification,  should  be  imposed  upon  it,  and  not  be 
suggested  by  it.  This  power  of  forming  self-explain- 
ing compounds  can,  however,  hardly  be  said  to  be 
lost :  it  is  rather  a  power  held  in  abeyance,  dwarfed 
by  disuse,  but  by  no  means  destroyed. 

These  changes  may  seem  to  have  seriously  impaired 
the  value  of  the  language.  To  a  certain  extent  it  may 
be  admitted  that  they  have  been  detrimental;  but 
they  have  been  far  less  so  than  they  appear.  It  would, 
indeed,  be  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  there  have  not 
been  great  gains  made,  as  well  as  great  losses  suffered. 
If  one  method  of  expression  is  denied  language, 
another  is  speedily  found  to  take  its  place.  The  giving 
up  of  numerous  Anglo-Saxon  formative  endings,  by 
which  words  were  changed  from  one  part  of  speech 
into  another,  has  been  largely  and  perhaps  wholly 
counterbalanced  in  INIodern  English  by  the  facility 
with  which  the  simple  words  themselves  now  pass 
from  one  part  of  speech  to  another.  Thus  black  is  an 
adjective;   but  it  is  used  likewise  as  a  noun  and  a 


S8  English  Language, 

verb.  Again :  stane  is  a  noun ;  but  it  is  also  a  verbi 
and  may  be  used  with  the  attributive  sense  of  an 
adjective,  as,  for  instance,  in  stone  house  and  sion& 
ja7'.  The  wide  employment  of  the  substantive  in  the 
manner  last  designated,  which  forms  one  of  the  most 
striking  peculiarities  of  Modern  English,  far  more  than 
offsets  any  loss  due  to  the  lack  of  facility  in  forming 
self-explaining  compounds.  Moreover,  if  many  words 
belonging  to  the  Anglo-Saxon  have  disappeared  from  the 
tongue  now  spoken,  their  places  have  been  more  than 
supplied  by  importations  from  foreign  sources ;  and 
these  have  now  become  so  thoroughly  identified  with 
the  words  that  have  come  from  the  original  speech, 
that,  in  a  large  number  of  cases,  no  one  but  the  special 
student  is  conscious  of  any  difference  in  their  origin. 
It  is  only  prejudice  or  ignorance  that  will  deny  that 
these  importations  have  added  immensely  to  the  re- 
sources of  the  language,  especially  in  its  power  of  rep- 
resenting dehcate  shades  of  thought,  and  the  higher 
and  more  complex  relations  which  exist  between  the 
conceptions  of  the  mind.  In  this  respect  the  bor- 
rowed words  stand  in  decided  contrast  to  the  native 
ones,  to  which  latter  is  mainly  left  the  representation 
of  all  deep  feeling.  The  language  of  the  reasoning 
faculties  is,  in  consequence,  largely  different  with  us 
from  the  languages  of  the  emotional  faculties,  with  the 
advantage  to  the  former,  that  it  gains  by  this  in  precis- 
ion, and  to  the  latter,  that  it  gains  in  vividness  and 
power.  There  results,  indeed,  from  the  union  of  the 
foreign  and  native  elements,  a  wealth  of  phraseology 


Capacity  of  Expression.  89 

and  a  many-sideness  in  the  English  tongue,  which  give 
it  in  these  respects  a  superiority  over  any  other  modern 
cultivated  speech.  German  is  strictly  a  pure  Teutonic 
speech ;  but  no  native  speaker  of  it  claims  for  it  any 
superiority  over  the  English  as  an  instrument  of  ex- 
pression, while  many  are  willing  to  concede  its  infe- 
riority. At  any  rate,  the  character  of  the  language, 
whether  for  good  or  ill,  was  fixed  for  all  succeeding 
time  at  the  beginning  of  the  Middle  English  period. 
We  may  grieve  over  it,  or  we  may  rejoice  over  it ;  but 
we  cannot  change  it.  What  it  then  became  under  the 
hand  of  the  great  writers  who  moulded  it,  that  it  has 
since  continued  essentially  to  be,  and  that  it  will  be 
certain  to  remain  so  long  as  it  lasts,  in  its  present  form, 
as  a  spoken  and  written  speech. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE    THREE    DIALECTS    OF     EARLY    ENGLISH, 
AND  THE  RISE  OF  THE   MIDLAND. 

It  has  already  been  remarked  that  the  dialect  in 
which  Chaucer  wrote  became  the  language  of  litera- 
ture, and  has  remained  as  such  until  this  day.  What 
was  this  dialect?  How  came  it  to  be  employed  by 
him?  What  was  its  relation  to  other  dialects,  or  to 
the  ancient  tongue  from  which,  in  a  certain  sense,  it 
may  be  said  to  have  descended  ?  To  make  the  answer 
to  these  questions  clear,  it  will  first  be  necessary  to 
recapitulate  at  this  point,  briefly  but  connectedly,  what 
has  been  said  elsewhere,  but  in  scattered  passages. 

Of  the  various  dialects  existing  during  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  period,  that  is  from  450  to  1150,  the  West- 
Saxon  was  the  one  that  attained  to  literary  supremacy. 
Enough  exists  of  the  form  of  language  spoken  in  the 
ancient  kingdom  of  Northumbria  to  make  it  certain 
that  the  speech  of  the  north  of  England  varied  in 
many  respects  from  that  of  the  south.  But,  as  the 
West-Saxon  is  the  only  one  of  the  earliest  English  dia- 

*         90 


Early  English  Dialects.  91 

lects  that  can  be  said  to  have  both  maintained  and 
preserved  a  Hterature,  it  is  for  us  the  Hterary  Anglo- 
Saxon,  the  only  remaining  type  of  our  tongue  in  its 
original  classical  form.  But  from  this  position  of  su- 
premacy the  Norman  conquest  had  the  speedy  effect 
of  displacing  it.  Its  special  forms  and  inflections,  its 
peculiarities  of  grammatical  construction,  could  not  be 
long  looked  upon  as  the  standard  of  correct  writing 
and  speaking.  Sucn  a  standard  could  /only~)be  main- 
tained^ljy'^an  educated  class  ;  and  the  attention  of  the 
educated  classes  was  from  this  time  turned  exclusively, 
either  to  Latin  or  to  French.  The  West-Saxon,  as  an 
inevitable  consequence,  sank  to  the  level  of  the  other 
dialects  :  it  had  no  longer  any  special  pre-eminence  of 
its  own.  Henceforward  he  who  \vrote  in  the  native 
language  wrote  in  that  form  of  it  with  which  he  was 
most  familiar.  He  wrote  in  the  dialect  of  the  district 
of  country  in  which  he  had  been  brought  up,  or  in 
which  he  dwelt ;  and,  with  nothing  existing  anywhere 
that  could  be  regarded  as  authority,  the  forces  that 
tend  to  bring  about  diversity  of  speech  were  sure  to 
gain  strength  more  rapidly  than  those  which  tend  to 
bring  about  uniformity. 

The  Three  Early  English  Dialects.  — Dur- 
ing these  centuries,  therefore,  —  the  twelfth,  the  thir- 
teenth, and  the  fourteenth,  —  it  is  to  be  borne  in  mind 
that  there  was  in  no  sense  a  national  language.  There 
existed  a  number  of  dialects,  each  one  of  which  had  as 
much  right  as  any  of  the  others  to  be  called  the  English 
language.     The  points  of  similarity  were  naturally  far 


92  English  Language. 

greater  in  number  and  in  importance  than  the  points 
ol"  dissimilarity ;  but,  for  all  that,  the  lattei  were  suffi- 
cient to  make  the  variations  observable  by  all,  and 
especially  the  difference  between  the  speech  of  the 
north  and  that  of  the  south  of  England.  This  at 
once  came  to  the  surface  as  soon  as  the  pressure  was 
vvithdra\\Ti  that  had  brought  all  the  previously  existing 
dialects  under  the  supremacy  of  the  West-Saxon.  It 
had  existed  from  the  earliest  period ;  but  it  only  be- 
came prominent  when  both  were  brought  to  a  common 
level  of  comparison  by  sharing  in  a  common  degrada- 
tion. But  little  more  than  half  a  century  had  passed 
after  the  conquest,  when  the  chronicler  William  of 
Malmesbury  asserted  that  the  speech  of  the  Northum- 
brians, especially  at  York,  sounded  so  rude  and  harsh 
to  the  men  of  the  South,  that  the  latter  were  scarcely 
able  to  understand  it.  Similar  testimony  to  this  diver- 
gence is  borne  by  Giraldus  Cambrensis,  a  scholar  who 
flourished  not  much  later.  About  1194  he  finished 
a  work  in  Latin,  giving  an  account  of  Wales ;  and  in 
it  he  incidentally  pointed  out  that  the  language  of 
Southern  England  was  more  ancient  in  its  character 
than  that  of  the  northern  parts,  and  much  closer  to 
the  original  tongue  as  presen-ed  in  writing. 

Upon  this  point  we  have  again  precise  and  positive 
testimony  from  Higden,  the  writer  of  the  first  half  of 
the  fourteenth  century  who  has  already  been  quoted 
on  this  question  of  language.  He  asserted  distinctly 
the  existence  of  three  leading  dialects  in  his  time. 
These  are  his  statements,  as  translated  by  Trevisa  :  — 


Early  English  Dialects,  93 

"  Also  Englysch  men,  theygh  hy  hadde  fram  the  bygynnyng 
thre  maner  speche,  Southeron,  Northeron,  and  Myddel  speche 
(in  the  myddel  of  the  lond),  as  hy  come  of  thre  maner  people 
of  Germania;  notheless,  by  commyxstion  and  mellyng,  furst  with 
Danes  and  afterward  with  Normans,  in  menye  the  contray 
longage  ys  apeyred,  and  some  vseth  strange  wlaffyng,  chyteryng, 
harryng  and  garryng,  grisbittyng.  [By  these  five  words  Trevisa 
translates  the  Tvatin  boatus  et  garritus\  .  .  .  Also,  of  the  for- 
£eyde  Saxon  tonge  that  ys  deled  a  thre,  and  ys  abyde  scars- 
lych  with  feaw  vplondysch  men,  and  ys  gret  wondur ;  for  men 
of  the  est  with  men  of  the  west,  as  hit  were  vndur  the  same 
party  of  heuene,  acordeth  more  in  sounyng  of  speche  than  men 
of  the  north  with  men  of  the  south ;  therfore  hyt  ys  that 
Mercij,  that  buth  men  of  Myddel  Engelond,  as  hyt  were  parte- 
ners  of  the  endes,  vndurstondeth  betre  the  syde  longages, 
Northeron  and  Southeron,  than  Northeron  and  Southeron  vndur- 
stondeth eyther  other."  ^ 

The   extant  writings   of  these   periods  bear  ample 
witness   to  the   truth  of  Higden's  statement.     There 
were,  especially  during  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth j 
centuries,  and  even  earlier,   three  great  divisions  of  I 
English  speech,  with  differences  so  pronounced,  that 
the  dwelling-place  of  a  man  within  certain  limits  could 

1  "  Also  Englishmen,  though  they  had  from  the  beginning  three  kinds  of 
speech,  Southern,  Northern,  and  Midland  speech  (in  the  middle  of  the  land), 
as  they  came  from  three  kinds  of  people  of  Germany,  nevertheless,  by  mixing 
and  mingling,  first  with  Danes  and  afterward  with  Normans,  in  many  the 
native  language  is  corrupted,  and  some  use  strange  babbling,  chattering,  growl- 
ing and  snarling,  teeth-grinding.  .  .  .  Also,  in  regard  to  the  aforesaid  Saxon 
tongue,  that  is  divided  into  three,  and  has  remained  [in  use]  with  [a]  few 
Dack-country  men,  there  is  great  wonder;  for  men  of  the  East  with  men 
of  the  West,  as  it  were  under  the  same  portion,  of  heaven,  agree  more  in 
the  sound  of  [their]  speech  than  men  of  the  North  with  men  of  the  South, 
therefore  it  is  that  the  Mercians,  that  are  men  of  Middle  England,  as  it  were 
partners  of  the  ends,  understand  better  the  border  languages,  Northern  and 
Southern,  than  either  Northern  or  Southern  understands  the  other." 


94  English  Language. 

be  immediately  told  by  his  language.  The  distinction 
is  traceable  now  without  difficulty  in  the  works  that 
have  been  handed  down  ;  but  it  was  as  fully  recognized 
then.  Chaucer,  for  illustration,  wrote  in  the  Midland 
dialect  of  the  eastern  counties  :  in  so  doing  he  regularly 
forms  the  third  person  singular  of  the  present  tense  of 
the  verb  in  -//z,  the  plural  in  -en  or  -e.  But  in  "  The 
Reeve's  Tale  "  he  introduces  two  characters  who  are 
described  as  coming  from  a  town  "  far  in  the  north  ;  " 
and  the  special  peculiarities  of  that  dialect  are  de- 
signedly represented  in  the  forms  they  use.  In  the  lan- 
guage put  into  their  mouths  the  third  person  singular 
of  the  present  tense  ends  in  -j",  as  generally  in  Modern 
English  :  the  plural  has  likewise  the  same  termination. 
Other  characteristics  of  the  speech  of  the  North,  or  of 
certain  varieties  of  it,  occur  frequently,  such  as  /  is, 
thou  is ;  the  use  of  a  for  o,  as  in  ga,  ham{e),  hald 
nat,  sang;  of  ///  ior  to ;  of  sal  for  shall;  and  others 
might  be  mentioned.  These  were  differences  that 
could  not  be  disregarded  by  a  writer  of  that  time. 
The  divergence,  indeed,  was  not  only  generally  recog- 
nized, it  was  also  so  deeply  marked,  that  works  com- 
posed in  either  of  the  two  extreme  dialects  required 
to  be  translated  into  the  other  in  order  to  be  under* 
stood.  A  well-known  early  English  poem,  the  "Cur 
§or  Mundi,"  already  mentioned,  was  written  about  the 
end  of  the  thirteenth  century  in  the  language  of  the 
North.  One  story  in  it  was  taken,  however,  from  a 
work  composed  in  the  dialect  of  the  South ;  and  the 
author  of  the  "  Cursor  Mundi "  speaks  of  the  latter  in 


Early  English  Dialects,  95 

words  which  would  almost  lead  one  to  think  that  he 
looked  upon  it  as  a  foreign  tongue ;  for,  after  men- 
tioning his  authority,  he  goes  on  to  say,  — 

"  In  a  writt  this  ilke  I  fand,  ,  ^^ .. 

Himself  it  wroght  I  understand.         .  -^  _.  ^  -.. 

Iji  Suthrin  Englijs  was  it  draun,  f.  >?.  o 

And  I  haue  turned  it  till  vr  aun 

Langage  of  the  northren  lede, 

That  can  nan  other  Englis  rede."  l 

Lines  20059-64. 

Geographical  Limits  of  the  Three  Dialects. 

—  The  geographical  limits  of  these  divisions  of  Eng- 
lish speech  may  be  roughly  stated  as  follows  :  the 
Northern  dialect  was  the  lineal  descendant  of  the 
Northumbrian  dialect  of  Anglo-Saxon,  and  it  covered 
about  the  same  extent  of  territory ;  that  is,  the  region 
stretching  from  the  Humber  on  the  south  to  the  Frith 
of  Forth  on  the  north,  and  bounded  by  the  Pennine 
Mountains  on  the  west.  It  was,  however,  during  the 
fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries,  and  later,  constantly 
making  its  way  still  farther  to  the  north,  in  Scodand. 
The  Midland  dialect  occupied  the  central  counties 
from  the  Humber  to  the  Thames,  and  the  district  west 
of  the  Pennine  chain  ;  and  the  Southern  stretched  from 
the  Thames  to  the  English  Channel,  with  a  portion  of 
the  western  counties  north  of  the  Thames.     It  is  not 

1  **  In  a  writing  this  same  [thing]  I  found; 
He  himself  composed  it,  I  understand. 
In  Southern  English  was  it  composed, 
And  I  have  turned  it  to  our  own 
Languag*  of  the  northern  people, 
That  can  read  no  other  English.** 


96  English  Language. 

to  be  understood  that  there  were  not  variations,  and 
great  variations,  within  these  lines  :  it  is  only  to  be  said 
that  the  differences  within  the  great  divisions  were 
slight  compared  with  the  resemblances.  The  Midland 
dialect,  however,  as  seen  in  the  speech  of  the  eastern 
and  the  western  counties,  was  in  some  points  so  dis- 
similar that  it  is  often  divided  into  the  East  Midland 
and  the  West  Midland. 

It  was  the  language  of  the  North  and  that  of  the 
South,  as  is  stated  by  Trevisa,  that  stood  the  farthest 
apart.  Between  these  two  wavered  the  dialect  of  the 
IMidland  counties ;  sometimes  and  in  some  places  in- 
clining to  the  one,  at  other  times  and  in  other  places 
inclining  to  the  other.  Each  one  of  the  three  called 
itself  the  English  speech,  but.  did  not  deny  the  title 
to  the  others.  Scotch  was  then  the  appellation  given 
to  the  tongue  of  the  Celtic  inhabitants  of  Northern 
Britain.  Its  modern  sense,  as  applied  to  one  variety 
of  our  language,  was  not  then  known.  But  one  im- 
portant thing  these  dialects  had  in  common.  The 
influx  of  French  words  into  their  vocabulary  was  about 
the  same  in  each,  and  occurred  at  about  the  same 
period.  On  whatever  other  points  they  differed,  here 
they  agreed.  The  Norman  conquest  did  not  bring 
Scotland  under  the  sway  of  a  foreign  race,  nor  were 
the  Scottish  Lowlands  parcelled  out  among  a  body 
of  nobles  who  spoke  a  strange  tongue ;  yet  French 
words  penetrated  at  about  the  same  time,  and  to 
about  the  same  extent,  not  only  into  the  English 
spoken  on  both  sides  of  the  H umber,  which  divided 


Early  English  Dialects.  97 

the  Northern  dialect  from  the  Midland,  but  also  into 
the  English  spoken  on  both  sides  of  the  Tweed,  which 
divided  the  two  kingdoms.  In  the  fourteenth  century 
the  language  of  Barbour,  the  Archdeacon  of  Aber- 
deen, shows  as  much  the  trace  of  French  influence  as 
does  that  of  his  contemporary  Chaucer,  the  comptroller 
of  the  port  of  London.  The  introduction  into  our 
tongue  of  the  Romance  element  was  in  no  sense  pecul- 
iar to  the  speech  of  any  one  dialect  or  any  one  dis- 
trict of  country  :  it  was  a  general  linguistic  movement, 
which  extended  to  every  place  where  English  was 
spoken  at  all. 

The  great  radical  distinction  between  the  speech  of 
the  North  and  of  the  South  was,  that  the  latter  was 
extremely  conservative  in  holding  on  to  its  grammati- 
cal inflections ;  while  the  former  let  them  go  rapidly. 
The  language  of  the  South  may,  perhaps,  be  spoken 
of  as  more  especially  the  descendant  of  the  West- 
Saxon  dialect,  the  classical  Anglo-Saxon  of  our  fathers  ; 
yet  it  was  far  from  adhering  to  it  so  closely  that  great 
variations  did  not  speedily  arise.  It  exhibited,  for 
instance,  in  course  of  time,  peculiar  pronominal  forms, 
such  as  is,  his,  lies,  meaning  '  them,'  for  which  there  is 
nothing  corresponding  to  be  found  in  the  monuments 
that  have  been  preserved  of  the  earliest  speech.  Still 
it  clung  as  firmly  as  it  well  could  to  the  original  forms 
and  inflections ;  and  whatever  it  gave  up,  it  gave  up 
reluctantly.  We  have  no  such  means  for  tracing  the 
linguistic  history  of  the  North  as  we  have  that  of  the 
South ;  for,  from  about  the  end  of  the  tenth  century 


98  Ejtglish  Language, 

to  the  end  of  the  thirteenth,  no  works  were  written  in 
the  language  spoken  in  or  descended  from  that  spoken 
in  the  ancient  Northumbria ;  or,  if  written,  they  have 
not  been  preserved.  But  it  is  evident  that  the  devel- 
opment of  the  Northern  dialect  was  in  the  sharpest 
contrast  to  that  of  the  Southern.  It  abandoned  its 
inflections  without  hesitation.  The  works  produced  in 
it  in  the  fourteenth  century  show,  that,  in  its  rejection 
of  grammatical  form,  it  had  even  then  frequently  gone 
farther  than  the  English  we  use  has  now,  or,  at  any 
rate,  had  shown  a  disposition  to  go  farther.  One  or 
two  illustrations  are  all  that  will  be  needed  at  this 
point.  The  ending  s  of  the  genitive  is  often  dropped  : 
jna?i  saul  appears  for  '  man's  soul.'  So  is  the  ending 
s  of  the  third  person  singular  of  the  present,  and  the 
ed  of  the  preterite,  seen  in  such  expressions  as  he 
ihiiik,  *he  thinks,'  and  in  he  eumand,  'he  commanded.' 
In  fact,  in  the  fourteenth  century  the  Northern  dialect 
had  moved  so  far  to  the  form  now  exhibited  by  Mod- 
ern English,  that  a  work  written  at  that  time,  if  printed 
in  the  existing  orthography,  would  present  but  few  and 
slight  difficulties  to  the  ordinary  reader,  so  far  as  inflec- 
tions and  grammatical  constructions  are  concerned. 

It  was  in  respect  to  slowness  or  swiftness  of  change 
that  the  great  characteristic  difference  manifested  itself 
between  the  speech  of  the  North  and  of  the  South. 
In  some  cases  ab  a  result  of  this,  in  others  entirely 
independent  of  it,  the  two  dialects  showed  marked 
divergences :  these  were  partly  orthographical,  pardy 
lexical,  partly  grammatical.     A  few  illustrations  will  be 


Differences  between  the  Dialects.  99 

given  to  make  this  statement  perfectly  clear;  those 
peculiarities  being  chosen  by  preference  which  have 
maintained  themselves  in  Modern  English.  First,  as 
regards  orthography.  The  Southern  dialect  was  in- 
chned  to  use  the  letter  v  for/,  a  tendency  which  was 
unknown  to  the  North ;  thus  the  Anglo-Saxon  fox,  a 
'  fox,'  djv^fixeii,  a  'female  fox,'  became  in  the  South- 
ern dialect  vox  and  vixen ;  and  Modern  English  has 
retained  the  original  form  of  the  one,  and  the  altered 
form  of  the  other.  Again  :  the  South  was  apt  to  turn 
the  Anglo-Saxon  c  mto  ch,  especially  before  the  vowels 
<f,  i,  and  y,  and  at  the  end  of  a  syllable  ;  whereas  this 
letter  was  represented  in  the  North  by  its  equivalent  /', 
the  sound  of  which  the  Anglo-Saxon  c  had  under  all 
circumstances.  Accordingly  the  Anglo-Saxon  cyrke, 
'church,'  became  in  the  Southern  dialect  chirche,  in 
the  Northern  kirk,  still  preserved  in  the  Scottish ;  the 
Anglo-Saxon  cernan,  'to  churn,'  and  cist,  a  'chest,' 
became  in  the  South  chime  and  chist,  and  in  the 
North  kirn  and  kist,  the  two  latter  of  which  are  also 
retained  in  the  dialectic  speech  of  the  North,  includ- 
ing the  Scottish.  Again  :  the  Anglo-Saxon  secan,  '  to 
seek,'  appeared  respectively  in  the  speech  of  the  two 
regions  as  secke{ii)  and  seke{ii).  In  the  simple  verb 
we  now  use  the  Northern  form,  but  in  the  compound 
beseech  we  follow  the  South.  As  regards  lexical  differ- 
ences, the  Northern  dialects  adopted  a  number  of 
Scandinavian  words,  brought  in  by  the  invasion  and 
settlement  of  the  Norsemen.  Comparatively  few  of 
these  found  their  way  into  the  South ;  though  some  of 


100  English  Language. 

them  were  adopted  into  the  speech  of  the  Midland 
dialects,  especially  in  those  counties  which  had  shared 
in  the  conquest  of  the  Danes,  and  in  this  way  they 
have  been  transmitted  to  Modern  English.  The  North- 
ern local  dialects  naturally  retain  them  in  somewhat 
large  numbers ;  as,  for  one  instance  that  will  do  for 
many,  the  word  gar,  '  to  cause,'  may  l.)e  adduced.  This 
comes  directly  from  the  Norse  verb  g'ora.  As  regards 
grammatical  differences,  besides  the  general  tendency 
of  the  North  to  drop  inflections  altogether,  and  the 
South  to  retain  them  as  long  as  possible,  there  was 
one  very  marked  characteristic  difference.  The  plural 
of  the  present  tense  of  the  verb  in  the  Northern  dia- 
lects either  ends  in  -s,  or  drops  the  termination  entire- 
ly;  in  the  Southern  it  ends  in  -th,  the  former  following 
in  the  ending  in  -s  the  old  Northumbrian  dialect,  the 
latter  the  West-Saxon.  Men  say  would  therefore  be 
represented  respectively  by  men  says  and  men  say- 
eth.  These  peculiarities  lasted  down  in  the  literary 
language  to  a  comparatively  late  period,  though  in 
modern  editions  the  text  is,  in  this  respect,  silently 
changed  whenever  possible.  The  usage  can  be  seen 
in  the  following  illustrations  :  — 

O  father  Abraham,  what  these  Christians  are 
Whose  own  hard  dealings  teaches  them  suspect 
The  thoughts  of  others. 

SuAKSPEARE,  Merchant  of  Venice,  act  i.  scene  3. 

A  board  groaning  under  the  heavy  burden  of  the  beasts 
that  chexvetk  the  cud.  —  Fletcher,  Woman-Hater,  act  i. 
scene  2. 


Differences  between  the  Dialects.        lOl 

Another  marked  difference  was  the  preference  eX" 
hibited  by  the  Southern  dialect  for  plurals  in  -en  in  the 
case  of  nouns.  This  was  based  upon  the  Anglo-Saxon 
plural  in  -an,  of  which  oxen  in  Modern  English  is  the 
only  genuine  survival.  But  the  termination  was  added 
in  the  Southern  dialect  to  many  nouns  which  etymolo- 
gically  had  no  right  to  it :  it  was  even  given  sometimes 
to  those  ending  originally  in  -as,  of  which  the  repre- 
sentative was  strictly  -cs.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
Northern  dialect  had  scarcely  any  plurals  in  -en  at  all, 
nearly  all  nouns  forming  their  plurals  in  -es  or  -s. 

Between  these  two  dialects  stood  that  of  the  Mid- 
land counties,  not  merely  in  respect  to  position,  but  in 
respect  to  language  also.  It  partook,  to  a  large  extent, 
of  the  peculiarities  of  each ;  while  in  some  particulars 
it  was  independent  of  both.  It  is  hard  to  affirm  or  to 
deny  that  it  is  a  direct  descendant  of  the  West-Saxon. 
If  we  maintain  the  former  view,  we  shall  have  to  admit 
that  some  of  its  distinguishing  characteristics  must 
have  come  from  a  dialect  or  dialects  existing  in  the 
Anglo-Saxon  period,  which,  however  widely  employed 
in  colloquial  speech,  left  no  trace  of  itself  or  of  them- 
selves in  written  literature.  On  the  other  hand,  it  fol- 
lows so  closely,  in  many  respects,  the  West-Saxon,  that, 
if  not  directly  derived  from  it,  we  must  assume  for  it  a 
descent  from  some  dialect  having  very  near  relation- 
ship with  that  tongue. 

Thus,  as  we  have  seen,  in  the  early  part  of  the 
fourteenth  century  three  great  dialects  existed  in 
Britain,  each  calling  itself  English,  each  possessing  a 


I02  English  Language, 

literature  of  its  own,  and  each  seemingly  having  about 
the  same  chance  to  become  the  representative  national 
tongue.  Of  these  three  it  was  the  Midland  that 
became  the  language  of  literature,  —  the  language  we 
speak  and  write  to-day;  and  its  supremacy  has  in- 
volved, as  one  result,  the  degradation  of  the  other  two, 
with  all  their  varieties,  to  the  condition,  in  general,  of 
local  patois,  maintaining  themselves  as  the  speech  of 
the  rude  and  uneducated  only,  and  destined,  with  the. 
greater  spread  of  education,  to  ultimate  extinction. 
Several  circumstances  concurred  to  give  predominance 
to  the  Midland  dialect.  In  the  first  place,  it  covered 
a  larger  extent  of  territory  than  either  of  the  others. 
In  particular,  the  strength  of  the  Northern  dialect  as  a 
rival  was  much  weakened  by  the  fact  that  no  small 
portion  of  the  region  in  which  it  was  spoken  had  from 
an  early  period  been  separated  from  England,  and 
been  placed  under  the  rule  of  the  king  of  the  Scots. 
In  the  second  place,  the  Midland  was  the  speech  of 
the  district  in  which  the  two  universities  of  Oxford 
and  Cambridge  were  situated ;  and  all  the  powerful 
linguistic  influences  that  flowed  from  these  two  great 
centres  of  higher  education  were  constantly  at  work 
to  extend  the  supremacy  of  the  form  of  speech  heard 
in  them.  These  influences  were,  moreover,  aided  by 
tlie  fact  that  this  dialect  was  in  its  nature  a  compro- 
mise between  the  two  found  on  each  side  of  it,  and 
could,  therefore,  be  much  more  readily  adopted  by 
both  than  could  either  by  the  other.  In  the  third 
place,  there  is  litde  doubt  that  the  Midland  was  the 


Rise  of  the  Midland  Dialect,  103 

speech  mainly  employed  at  the  court  and  the  capital, 
as  the  French  was  gradually  displaced  from  its  position 
as  the  language  of  social  intercourse.  All  of  these 
contributed  to  give  it  special  prominence  as  the 
dialect  destined  to  become  the  representative  one  of 
the  whole  nation.  Yet,  powerful  as  these  various 
agencies  were  in  themselves,  they  were  insufficient  to 
establish  its  supremacy  over  the  rest,  and  cause  them 
to  sink  into  subordinate  positions,  of  which  not  only 
others  would  be  conscious,  but  which  would  be  ac- 
knowledged by  themselves.  No  really  national  lan- 
guage could  exist  until  a  literature  had  been  created 
which  would  be  admired  and  studied  by  all  who  could  i 
read,  and  taken  as  a  model  by  all  who  could  write. 
It  was  only  a  man  of  genius  that  could  lift  up  one 
of  these  dialects  into  a  pre-eminence  over  the  rest,  or 
could  ever  give  to  the  scattered  forces  existing  in  any 
one  of  them  the  unity  and  vigor  of  life.  This  was  the 
work  that  Chaucer  did.  He  it  was  that  first  showed  to 
all  men  the  resources  of  the  language,  its  capacity  of 
representing  with  discrimination  all  shades  of  human 
thought,  and  of  conveying  with  power  all  manifesta- 
tions of  human  feeling.  His  choice  of  the  Midland, 
or  rather  the  fact  of  his  writing  in  it,  raised  it  at  once 
into  a  position  of  superiority  which  was  never  after- 
wards disputed.  His  productions,  scattered  everywhere, 
unconsciously  affected  the  speech  of  all  who  read,  and^ 
were  consciously  looked  upon  by  all  who  set  out  to 
^Tite  as  the  authoritative  standard  of  expression.  The 
ivords  and  grammatical  forms  he  used,  the  syntacticaj 


I04  English  Language. 

methods  of  construction  he  followed,  became  the  ones 
generally  adopted  by  his  successors.  With  him,  in- 
deed, began  the  exercise  of  that  great  conservative 
restraint  which  literature  throws  about  language,  which 
arrests  all  sudden  changes,  and  which,  so  long  as  it 
operates  unimpaired,  renders  revolution  or  anarchy  in 
the  speech  an  impossibility. 

It  has  already  been  stated  that  the  Midland  dialect 
was  not  altogether  uniform ;  and  that  it  has  been  di- 
vided into  that  of  the  Eastern  and  of  the  Western 
counties.  It  was  in  the  former  of  these  that  Chaucer 
wrote.  To  speak  with  absolute  precision,  it  is  there- 
fore to  be  said  that  the  cultivated  English  language,  in 
which  nearly  all  English  literature  of  value  has  been 
written,  sprang  directly  from  the  East  Midland  variety 
of  the  Midland  dialect.  To  that  it  owes  the  forms  of 
its  words  and  its  leading  grammatical  characteristics, 
though  in  these  respects  it  has  likewise  been  influenced 
in  particulars  by  the  speech  both  of  the  North  and  of 
the  South. 

The  Scotch  Dialect. — But,  while  these  three 
dialects  were  in  use  in  England,  it  was  the  Northern 
alone  that  was  spoken  in  Scotland ;  and,  as  the  Scotch 
is  the  only  dialect  of  English  that  can  be  said  to  have 
a  literature  of  its  own,  a  brief  account  of  it  is  here  in 
place.  This  Northern  dialect  had  in  that  country 
gradually  spread  itself  on  every  side  from  its  original 
centre  in  the  South,  had  crossed  the  Forth,  and, 
steadily  pressing  back  the  Celtic  tongues,  had  in  the 
fourteenth  century  made  its  way  along  the  coast  as 


The  Scotch  Diat^t  "fO"  t  T?  T?  T?  <ST  T 

far  as  the  Moray  Firth.  The  political  separation  of 
England  and  Scotland,  at  a  period  when  no  literary 
standard  existed  anywhere,  would  of  itself  have  been 
almost  certain  to  develop,  in  process  of  time,  differ- 
ences in  the  speech  of  both,  even  had  it  been  precisely 
the  same  in  the  beginning.  But  a  special  cause 
increased  a  divergence  that  was  in  any  event  sure  to 
take  place  to  a  certain  extent.  While,  in  the  one 
country,  it  was  tiie  Midland  dialect  that  became  the 
ruling  one,  in  the  other  it  was  the  Northern,  —  the  only 
one  known  there  at  all.  Accordingly  the  literary 
language  in  Scotland  had  a  linguistic  development  in 
some  measure  independent  of  that  found  south  of  the 
Tweed.  At  the  same  time,  it  is  not  to  be  forgotten 
that  Scotch,  as  an  epithet  applied  to  speech,  meant 
originally  the  Erse  of  the  Celtic  inhabitants ;  that 
what  we  call  the  Scotch  tongue,  or  dialect,  is  really 
English,  and,  moreover,  that  it  was  invariably  called 
English  by  the  men  who  wrote  in  it  during  the  four- 
teenth and  fifteenth  centuries,  and  generally  by  those 
who  wrote  in  it  during  the  sixteenth.  It  was  then, 
however,  sometimes  designated  as  the  Scotch  tongue, 
as  opposed  to  the  English ;  but  after  the  union  of  the 
two  countries  by  the  accession,  in  1603,  of  James  to 
the  English  throne,  it  sank  from  its  independent  posi- 
tion, and  came  to  be  considered  and  called  the  Scotch 
dialect  of  the  English  language. 

Scotch  literature  may  be  said  to  begin  with  John 
Barbour,  Archdeacon  of  Aberdeen,  who  died  in  1395, 
but  finished  in  1375  a  long  histwical  poem  called  "  The 


fo6  English  Language. 

Bruce,"  in  which  he  celebrated  the  deeds  of  Robert 
Bruce.    It  has  been  several  times  printed,  and  contains 
between  thirteen  and  fourteen  thousand  lines.      He 
was  followed,  in  the  beginning  of  the  fifteenth  century, 
by  Andrew  of  Wynton,  prior  of  the  monastery  of  St. 
Serf,  in  the  Isle  of  Loch  Leven,  who  wrote  in  nine 
books  the  "  Orygynal  Cronykil  of  Scotland."     Of  the 
works  attributed  to  James  I.,  who  reigned  nominally 
from  1406  to    1437,  and  actually  ruled  the  country 
from   1424  to   1437,  the  only  one  certainly  known  to 
be  his  is  "The  Kinges  Quhair,"  a  poem  of  nearly  four- 
teen hundred  lines,  in  praise  of  the  daughter  of  the 
Earl  of  Somerset,  who  afterwards  became  his  wife.    In 
the  latter  half  of  the  fifteenth  century  the  legendary 
exploits  of  Wallace  were  celebrated  in  a  poem  of  nearly 
twelve  thousand  lines,  attributed  to  Henry  the  Min- 
strel, or  Blind   Harry  as  he  is  commonly  called.     A 
number  of  poetical  compositions  were  produced  also 
at   this   time   by   Robert  Henryson   of  Dunfermline. 
Among  his  writings  may  be  mentioned  a  collection  of 
thirteen  fables,  and  "The  Testament  of  Cresseid,"  a 
sequel  to  the  Troilus  and  Cressida  of  Chaucer.     The 
greatest  name  of  all  this  early  period  is  William  Dunbar, 
who  flourished  from  about  1460  to  about  1 5  20,  and  whose 
works  were  both  numerous,  and  varied  in  their  char- 
acter.    Contemporary  with  him  was  Gawin  Douglas, 
Bishop  of  Dunkeld,  whose   most   famous  production 
was  his  translation  of  Virgil.     But  perhaps  the  poet 
of  the  sixteenth  century  who  was  then  most  popular, 
and  continued  to  be  so^down  even  to  the  last  century, 


The  Scotch  Dialect.  107 

was  Sir  David  Lyndsay.  His  works  are  specially  re- 
markable as  having  exerted  great  influence  in  helping 
forward  the  cause  of  the  Reformation.  The  later 
literature  in  the  Scotch  dialect,  after  the  union  of  the 
crowns,  is  very  rich,  particularly  in  ballad  and  lyric 
poetry,  and  is  much  of  it  of  an  order  of  merit  to 
which  the  literature  before  the  union  can  rarely  lay 
claim.  This  latter,  indeed,  has  received  much  praise 
from  some  \  but  to  most  readers  the  works  belonging 
to  it  are  apt  to  seem  uninteresting,  and  they  are 
certainly  very  long.  In  spite  of  the  excellence  of 
occasional  passages,  and  even  of  occasional  poems, 
it  must  be  said  of  early  Scottish  literature,  that,  taken 
as  a  whole,  it  requires  patience  to  read  it,  and  pa- 
triotism to  admire  it. 

The  particular  variety  of  the  Northern  dialect 
which  was  adopted  in  literature  while  Scodand  re- 
mained an  independent  kingdom  was  that  spoken  in 
Edinburgh  and  its  neighborhood.  This  was  naturally 
affected  somewhat  by  the  Celtic  speech,  with  which 
it  came  into  close  contact ;  and  the  long  alliance  with 
France  introduced  into  it  from  that  tongue  a  large 
number  of  words  never  used,  either  in  conversation  or 
in  wTiting,  south  of  the  Tweed.  The  influence  of 
Chaucer,  both  on  style  and  manner  of  treatment,  is, 
however,  very  noticeable  in  the  compositions  of  several 
of  the  early  Scotch  poets  ;  and  it  is  a  signal  illustration 
of  the  power  over  the  development  of  a  language 
exerted  by  an  author  of  great  genius,  that  many  forms 
characteristic  of  the  Midland  or  Southern  dialect,  but 


lo8  English  Language, 

foreign  to  the  Northern,  were  introduced  from  his 
works  into  the  variety  of  the  latter  dialect  in  which 
early  Scotch  literature  was  composed,  though  they 
seem  never  to  have  maintained  themselves  there. 
The  superiority  of  English  literature  could  not,  indeed, 
fail  to  make  itself  felt  in  the  case  of  tongues  so  nearly 
allied.  Still,  had  the  two  countries  continued  to  be 
separate  nationalities,  differences  in  the  speech  would 
have  become  thoroughly  established;  and  in  the 
Island  of  Great  Britain  there  would  have  been  two 
sister  languages  as  distinct  from  one  another  as  are, 
for  instance,  Spanish  and  Portuguese.  But  the  union 
of  the  two  crowns  at  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth 
century  reduced  the  Scottish,  from  the  position  of  a 
tongue  independent  of  the  English,  to  that  of  a  dialect 
of  it.  Having  no  longer  any  common  literary  stand- 
ard within  its  borders,  it  speedily  diverged  into  a 
number  of  local  dialects,  each  of  which  has  peculiari- 
ties of  its  own  due  to  its  surroundings,  and  all  of 
which,  when  used  in  literature,  have  been  largely 
affected  by  the  influence  of  the  standard  English. 
No  small  share  of  the  poetry  composed  in  what  is 
called  the  Scotch  dialect  is  Scotch  rather  in  name 
than  in  reality :  it  is  literary  English  clothed  in  Scot- 
tish spelling,  and  rendered  only  a  little  more  strange 
by  the  introduction  of  a  few  provincial  words.  Of 
course,  in  such  a  statement,  it  is  only  the  written  lan- 
guage that  is  considered,  not  the  spoken;  for  the 
Scotch  pronunciation  varies  widely  in  some  respects 
from  that  of  the  classical  tongue.     But  this  adoption 


The  S  CO  tell  Dialect.  1 09 

of  forms  and  grammatical  constructions  belonging  to 
the  English  of  literature  shows,  that,  even  in  this 
peculiar  home  of  the  Northern  dialect,  the  Midland 
has,  here  as  elsewhere,  proved  too  powerful  for  its 
ancient  rival. 


CHAPTER   VII. 

CHANGES    IN    THE    MIDDLE    ENGLISH    PERIOD 

{1350-1550)- 

It  is  with  the  Middle  English  period  that  English 
literature  in  the  limited  but  Strictly  proper  sense  of 
the  word  may  be  said  to  begin.  The  production  of 
writings  of  a  character  so  high  as  to  be  recognized 
everywhere  as  an  authoritative  standard  of  expression 
could  not  fail  to  have  an  immediate  effect  upon  the 
future  of  the  language.  It  was  the  one  great  result  of 
the  influence  now  brought  to  bear  upon  it,  that,  from 
the  end  of  the  fourteenth  century,  our  tongue  has 
pursued  an  orderly  development.  It  suffers  changes, 
and,  indeed,  constant  changes,  both  in  grammar  and 
in  vocabulary :  if  it  did  not,  it  would  no  longer  be  a 
living  speech.  But  these  changes  take  place  within 
certain  well-defined  limits ;  they  require  the  consent 
of  vast  numbers,  sometimes  of  generations ;  they  are 
spread  over  great  spaces  of  time.  The  conservative 
and  restraining  influence  of  literature  over  language 
necessarily  grows  more  powerful  with  every  successive 
110 


Changes  in  the  Middle  English  Period.    1 1 1 

century,  because  literature  itself  is  read  and  studied 
by  constantly  increasing  numbers.  The  changes  that 
have  taken  place  during  the  five  hundred  years  that 
have  gone  by  since  the  beginning  of  the  Middle  Eng- 
lish period  bear  not  the  slightest  comparison,  in  either 
extent  or  importance,  with  those  that  took  place 
during  the  two  hundred  years  before  that  period. 
How  comparatively  insignificant  the  former  are  has 
already  been  fully  exemplified  in  the  extract  which  has 
been  given  from  Chaucer,  with  the  ancient  spelling  in 
one  case  preserved,  and  in  the  other  case  with  it  mod- 
ernized.^ An  examination  of  these  shows  clearly  that 
it  is  the  difference  of  orthography,  far  more  than  the 
difference  of  vocabulary  and  of  construction,  that 
makes  the  language  of  the  fourteenth  century  seem 
difficult. 

English,  therefore,  from  this  time  forth,  enters  upon 
an  entirely  new  history.  Its  changes  during  the 
various  periods  since  have  been  changes  in  degree, 
but  never  in  kind.  In  order  to  comprehend  clearly 
the  character  of  the  transitions  through  which  it  has 
gone  during  the  past  five  hundred  years,  it  is  necessary 
to  have  well  in  mind  one  or  tvvo  principles  that  under- 
lie the  development  of  language.  It  has  already 
been  pointed  out,  that,  in  the  speech  of  rude  and 
ignorant  men,  grammatical  changes  take  place  rapidly ; 
whereas,  under  ordinary  circumstances,  few  new  words 
are  added  to  the  vocabulary.  This  fact  becomes  very 
noticeable  when  a  cultivated  tongue  ceases  to  be  used 

1  Pages  79,  80. 


112  English  Language. 

any  longer  by  the  educated,  and  is  heard  only  from 
the  mouths  of  the  illiterate.  The  vaiiations  which 
spring  up  under  such  circumstances  are  easy  of  obser- 
vation, because  we  have  an  ideal  standard  preserved  by 
which  to  compare  the  present  with  the  past.  But  the 
precise  reverse  of  this  condition  of  things  is  true  of 
any  language  in  which  is  embodied  the  spoken  and 
written  speech  of  a  cultivated  people.  In  it  no  sud- 
den alterations  can  be  made  in  the  grammar,  because 
great  literary  models  have  given  permanent  form 
and  character  to  that  which  already  exists.  Nor  can 
violent  alterations  be  ever  made  without  a  revolution 
mighty  enough  to  upset  the  language  itself  in  its  exist- 
ing form.  While,  therefore,  in  a  cultivated  speech, 
changes  in  inflection  and  syntax  do  take  place,  they 
invariably  take  place  slowly  and  on  a  small  scale ; 
and,  if  they  happen  to  attract  observation  at  the  time, 
they  never  succeed  in  establishing  themselves  without 
a  struggle.  On  the  other  hand,  the  vocabulary  is 
constantly  increasing.  The  domain  of  knowledge  is 
always  widening ;  and  new  terms  are  constantly  needv^d 
to  express  the  new  facts  which  the  many-sided  activity 
of  the  race  has  gathered,  and  the  new  ideas  it  has 
conceived.  An  existing  vocabulary,  therefore,  can- 
not for  any  long  period  satisfy  the  demand  made  upon 
it ;  or,  in  other  words,  a  living  tongue  can  never 
become  what  is  called  fixed  until  the  men  who  speak 
it  get  to  be  intellectually  dead.  There  is,  in  conse- 
quence, an  absolute  necessity  resting  upon  every 
generation,  either  of  developing  new  words  from  exist- 


Cha7tges  in  the  Middle  English  Period.    113 

ing  roots,  or  of  imposing  new  senses  upon  words 
already  in  use,  or  of  borrowing  strange  words  from 
foreign  tongues ;  and  in  modern  languages  it  will  be 
found  that  these  three  agencies  are  in  active  operation 
side  by  side. 

From  the  beginning  of  the  Middle  English  period 
till  the"  present  time,  aversion  to  grammatical  change, 
with  consequent  slowness  in  its  adoption,  and  fondness 
for  new  or  foreign  words,  and  facility  in  their  formation 
or  introduction,  have  been  especially  characteristic  of 
our  tongue.  During  the  first  two  centuries  the  former 
feeling  had  the  least  influence ;  during  the  last  three 
the  latter  has  made  itself  more  conspicuous.  The 
composite  character  of  the  vocabulary  had  been  es- 
tablished by  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century ;  by 
the  end  of  it  the  language  had  received  and  assimilated 
nearly  all  the  words  it  has  ever  taken  from  the  Old 
French.  During  the  fifteenth  century  there  was  not 
very  much  addition  from  any  quarter.  It  was  not 
until  the  close  of  the  Middle  English  period  that  new 
words  began  to  come  in  in  large  numbers,  and  then, 
as  a  general  rule,  they  were  taken  directly  from  the 
Latin.  This  smallness  of  addition  to  the  vocabulary 
was  mainly  due  to  the  failure  of  the  intellectual  move- 
ment that  had  begun  so  auspiciously  in  the  latter 
half  of  the  fourteenth  century.  Chaucer  died  in  1400  ; 
but  he  left  no  successors  to  his  genius  or  his  authority  ; 
?jid,  for  one  hundred  and  fifty  years  after  his  death, 
literature  was  in  a  state  of  collapse.  As,  therefore, 
the  lexical  changes  were  slight,  it  is  the  grammatical 


114  English  Language. 

changes  that  are  for  us,  during  this  period,  the  matter 
of  chief  importance. 

In  these  the  two  counteracting  influences  that  liter- 
ature exerts  over  language  began  to  show  themselves 
at  once.  One  of  them  is  the  tendency  to  produce 
uniformity,  the  other  the  tendency  to  arrest  all  change  ; 
no  matter  in  either  case  whether  the  result  is  to  be  de- 
sired or  to  be  deplored.  From  the  conflict  of  these 
opposing  agencies  the  grammatical  forms  of  the  lan- 
guage came  out  at  the  end  of  the  Middle  English 
period  what  we  now  find  them.  The  reduction  to 
uniformity  that  was  then  effected  has  never  since  been 
disturbed  :  the  anomahes  that  were  then  left  in  our 
speech  have  remained  with  us  still.  Here  the  most 
important  of  the  changes  that  took  place  are  all  that 
can  be  given. 

Declension  of  Nouns.  —  In  the-  writings  of 
Chaucer  a  number  of  nouns  still  failed  to  form  their 
plurals  in  -i",  according  to  what  had  by  that  time  be- 
come the  regular  ending.  Some  of  them  terminated 
in  -n,  either  in  strict  accordance  with  the  original 
Anglo-Saxon  declension  in  -an ;  others  had  had  that 
termination  added  by  what  had  originally  been  a 
blunder,  but  which  blunder  had  in  his  time  become 
correct  usage.  By  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  century 
all  of  the  former  class  had  passed  over  to  the  regular 
formation  in  -s,  with  the  single  exception  of  oxen. 
Eyen  or  eyne  may  also  be  found  along  with  eyes,  but 
then,  as  occasionally  now,  only  in  poetry ;  and  the  same 
statement  is  true  of  one  or  two  oUier  words.     Of  the 


Changes  in  the  Middle  Eiiglistt  Period,    1 1 5 

latter  class,  children  (A.  S.  cildru)  and  brethren  (A.  S. 
brothrii)  and  kine  (A.  S.  cy)  still  retain  an  n  to  which 
etymologically  they  are  not  entitled ;  but,  in  the  six- 
teenth century,  the  regular  forms  brothers  and  cows 
established  themselves  alongside,  and  have  for  most 
purposes  supplanted  the  older  plurals.  So,  again,  in 
Chaucer,  a  number  of  nouns  are  found  with  the  plural 
of  the  same  form  as  the  singular.  They  are  usually 
descendants  of  tne  Anglo-Saxon  neuter  noun  of  the 
vowel-declension,  many  of  which  had  the  nominative 
and  accusative  plural  the  same  as  the  nominative  and 
accusative  singular.  Some  of  these  also  assumed  the  s. 
Thing  and  year,  for  illustration,  were  originally  plural 
as  well  as  singular ;  but  they  added  during  this  period 
the  final  -s. 

Declension  of  the  Third  Personal  Pro- 
noun.—  The  only  change  of  importance  in  the  pro- 
noun that  took  place  during  the  Middle  English 
period  was  in  the  plural  of  the  pronoun  of  the  third 
person.  In  Chaucer  this  had  they  in  the  nominative, 
but,  in  the  genitive  and  objective,  here  and  hem,  the 
descendants  of  the  forms  used  in  the  Anglo-Saxon. 
In  place  of  these,  their  and  them,  corresponding  in  form 
to  the  nominative,  were  substituted  in  the  speech  of 
all,  as,  even  as  early  as  the  fourteenth  century,  they 
had  been  used  in  the  speech  of  many. 

Inflection  of  the  Adjective. — At  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Middle  English  period  the  adjective  had 
been  nearly  stripped  of  the  numerous  inflections  it  had 
possessed  in  the  Anglo-Saxon.     During  the  two  centu* 


Ii6  English  Language. 

ries  that  followed,  it  lost  the  little  it  had  retained.  The 
use  of  the  final  e,  to  denote  the  plural  and  the  definite 
declension  in  the  singular,  was  abandoned  altogether  \ 
and  the  adjective  was  left,  as  we  now  have  it,  without 
any  inflection  whatever.  In  its  comparison  the  vowel- 
modification,  which  in  some  cases  it  underwent  in 
Chaucer  and  his  contemporaries,  disappeared  before 
the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  century.  Long  and  strong 
and  old,  at  the  beginning  of  the  Middle  English  period, 
had  for  comparatives  Icjiger,  strenger,  and  elder ;  at  the 
end  of  it,  they  had  the  regular  forms,  longer,  stronger, 
and  older,  now  in  use ;  though  the  last-named  word, 
old,  still  retained,  as  at  present,  both  forms. 
.  Inflection  of  the  Verb. — The  fact  has  already 
been  mentioned,  that,  after  the  Norman  conquest,  the 
disposition  became  widely  prevalent  to  drop  the  final 
n.  But,  though  this  was  always  in  operation,  it  had 
not,  even  in  the  time  of  Chaucer,  been  carried  out  to  a 
complete  result.  In  his  writings  the  infinitive  of  the 
verb,  and  the  plural  number  of  both  the  present  and 
the  past  tenses  of  the  indicative,  end  in  en  or  e  ;  thus 
we  have  to  hope7i  or  to  hope,  they  hopen  or  they  hope, 
and  they  hopeden  or  they  hopede.  In  the  case  of  the 
j^ast  tense  it  is  not  at  all  unfrequent,  also,  to  have  the 
finii  (?  dropped  in  pronunciation:  it  sometimes  hap- 
pened in  the  case  of  the  other  two  parts  of  the  verb 
that  have  been  mentioned.  This  tendency  to  drop  the 
n,  which  had  been  the  prevailing  one  in  the  fourteenth 
century,  became  almost  universally  established  in  the 
fifteenth.     Ben  Jonson  in  his  English  Grammar  asserts, 


Changes  in  the  Middle  English  Period.    1 1 7 

that,  until  about  the  reign  of  King  Henry  VIII.  (1509- 
1547),  present  plurals  were  found  in  en.  But,  though 
they  are  found  at  that  time,  they  lingered  then,  as 
they  did  at  a  later  period,  as  survivals  of  the  past, 
rather  than  as  forms  in  living,  current  use.  Along  with 
the  11  gradually  disappeared  the  final  e.  It  was  dropped 
universally  during  the  fifteenth  century  in  pronuncia- 
tion :  in  some  cases  it  was  dropped  in  the  spelling, 
and  in  other  cases  retained. 

This  same  remark  is  also  tme  of  the  final  e  of  the 
noun,  and,  indeed,  of  all  the  other  parts  of  speech  in 
which  it  is  found.  In  some  cases  the  e  was  retained  in 
the  spelling  after  it  had  disappeared  from  the  pronun- 
ciation, as  in  love,  fame,  and  numerous  other  words, 
where  its  retention  has  been  of  no  use.  Again  :  it  has 
been  dropped  both  in  spelling  and  pronunciation,  as 
in  peyne,  pain,  trouthe,  truth,  and  bllsse,  bliss,  and  also 
in  adverbs  derived  from  adjectives,  such  as  hrighie, 
lowe,  faire,  deepe,  in  which,  had  it  been  retained,  it 
would  have  had  the  one  merit  of  distinguishing  one 
part  of  speech  from  another. 

There  was,  as  may  be  inferred,  a  steady  movement 
toward  uniformity  of  inflection  during  the  Middle 
English  period.  But,  while  this  accomplished  much,  it 
.did  not  succeed  in  accomplishing  every  thing.  Anom- 
alous forms  still  continued  to  exist.  Though  sistren 
and  doiighteren  and  ton  had  become  sisters  and  daugh- 
ters and  toes,,  oxen  and  children  had  failed  to  pass  over 
into  oxes  and  childers  ;  though  the  plural  hors  dindfolk 
and  year  and  thing  had  become   horses,  folks,  years^ 


1 1 8  English  Language. 

and  things,  sheep  and  deer  had  not  become  sheeps 
and  deers.  Nor  did  plurals  whose  form  was  due  to 
vowel  modification,  such  as  men,  feet,  mice,  geese,  lose 
any  of  their  numbers  after  the  fourteenth  century.  The 
complete  success  of  any  radical  movement  to  bring 
about  an  ideal  uniformity  was  in  a  large  number  of 
instances  counteracted  by  that  conservative  opposition 
to  all  change  which  is  a  marked  characteristic  of  cul- 
tivated speech.  This  has  been  seen  in  the  inflection 
of  the  noun ;  but  it  most  conspicuously  asserted  itself 
in  the  conjugation  of  the  verb.  Here  a  movement 
toward  uniformity  which  had  been  in  active  operation 
since  the  break-up  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  was  finally 
arrested.  Not  only,  indeed,  was  it  arrested,  but  it 
may  be  said  that  a  movement  in  the  opposite  direction 
started  into  being,  though  it  has  never  been  productive 
of  important  results. 

There  are  in  English,  as  in  every  other  Teutonic 
tongue,  two  leading  conjugations  of  the  verbs,  —  one 
called  the  old,  or  strong,  conjugation ;  the  other,  the 
weak,  or  new.  The  main  distinction  between  them  is 
easy  of  comprehension.  The  weak  verb,  to  form  the 
past  tense,  adds,  or  originally  added,  a  syllable,  in 
Anglo-Saxon,  de,  which,  under  certain  circumstances, 
became  te.  In  a  very  few  cases,  also,  the  vowel  of  its. 
root  was  varied  ;  thus,  drygan, '  to  dry,'  foi;med  a  pret- 
erite dryg-de ;  drypan,  *to  drip,'  formed  the  preterite 
drip-te  ;  tellan,  ^to  tell,'  formed  the  preterite  teal-de ; 
secan,  *  to  seek,'  formed  the  preterite  soh-te.  On  the 
other  hand;  the  strong  conjugation  added  nothing  to 


Changes  in  the  Middle  Engl  is  Ji  Period.    119 

form  the  past  tense,  but  the  vowel  of  the  root  in  every 
case  underwent  change  ;  thus,  d?'inc-an,  '  to  drink,' 
had  in  the  first  person  of  the  preterite  singular  dranc , 
glid-an,  '  to  glide/  had  for  the  corresponding  form  of 
the  preterite  glod.  For  the  three  centuries  immediately 
following  the  Norman  conquest  the  distinction  between 
these  two  conjugations  was  largely  broken  down;  but 
the  changes  that  resulted  inured  to  the  benefit  of  only 
one  of  them.  Numbers  of  verbs  originally  having  the 
strong  inflection  gave  it  up,  and  took  the  weak  in  its 
place.  So  many,  indeed,  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  strong 
verbs  had  been  wholly  lost  to  the  language  by  the 
beginning  of  the  middle  English  period,  furthermore, 
so  many  of  those  that  were  retained  had  become  weak, 
and  the  general  movement  in  that  direction  was  so 
decided,  that  it  seemed  merely  a  question  of  time 
when  the  strong  inflection  would  disappear  entirely. 
But  this  movement  received  a  check  with  the  creation 
of  a  great  native  literature.  In  fact,  the  strong  con- 
jugation has  lost  nothing  during  the  past  three  hun- 
dred years,  and  has  lost  but  litde  during  the  past  five 
hundred.  One  illustration  will  make  this  statement 
perfectly  clear.  "  The  Canterbury  Tales  "  of  Chaucer 
contain  more  than  seventeen  thousand  lines  of  poetry : 
an  examination  of  the  strong  preterites  as  found  in  the 
poetry  of  that  work  show  that  of  them  only  the  follow- 
ing twelve  have  in  Modern  English  passed  over  com- 
pletely or  partially  to  the  weak  conjugation  :  — 


I20 


English  Language. 


Modem  Eaglish 

Preterites  used  by 

Modern  English 

Infinitives. 

Chaucer. 

Preterites. 

I.  carve, 

carf. 

carved. 

2.  gnaw, 

gnew. 

gnawed. 

3.  glide, 

glod, 

glided. 

4.  laugh. 

lough, 

laughed. 

5.  leap, 

leep. 

leapt. 

6.  quake, 

quok, 

quaked. 

7.  shape. 

schop, 

shaped. 

8.  starve, 

starf. 

starved. 

9.  swell. 

swal, 

swelled. 

10.  wash. 

wessch. 

washed. 

II.  wax. 

wax. 

waxed. 

12.  wield. 

weld. 

wielded. 

The  three  following,  again,  had  already,  in  Chaucer's 
time,  begun  to  conform  to  the  tendency,  then  preva- 
lent, to  pass  over  to  the  weak  conjugation.  It  will  be 
noticed  that  they  have,  with  him,  both  weak  and  strong 
fonns ;  like  thrive,  for  illustration,  which  has  the  double 
preterites  throve  and  thrived. 


Modem  English 
Infinitives. 

1.  creep, 

2.  sleep, 

3.  weep, 


Preterites  used  by 
Chaucer. 


(  creep, 
(  crepte, 
V  sleep, 
(  s^epte, 


(  weep, 
t  w 


epte, 


Modern  English 
Preterites. 

crept, 
slept, 
wept. 


Again  :  the  four  following  verbs,  inflected  strong  by 
Chaucer,  have  in  Modern  English  both  a  strong  and 
weak  inflection,  though,  in  the  case  of  climb  and  help, 
the  strong  preterite  is  poetic  or  provincial. 


Changes  in  the  Middle  English  Period.    12 1 


Modern  English 
Infinitives. 

I.  climb, 


2.  crow, 

3.  heave, 

4.  help, 


Preterites  used  by 
Chaucer. 

clomb, 


haf. 


halp, 


Modern  English 
Preterites. 
(  clomb, 
(  climbed, 
j  crew, 
I  crowed, 
hove, 
heaved. 
(  holp, 
(  helped. 


On  the  other  hand,  four  of  the  verbs  inflected  by 
Chaucer  according  to  the  weak  conjugation  have,  by 
a  kind  of  counter-movement,  passed  over  to  the  strong, 
and  are  now  inflected  accordingly.  Two  of  them, 
grind  and  grow,  are  strong  in  Anglo-Saxon ;  but  the 
other  two  are  weak.  It  ought  to  be  added,  that,  in 
the  case  of  griiid  and  grow,  Chaucer  has  the  strong 
past  participle  in  en. 


Modern  English 
Infinitives. 


Preterites  used  by 
Chaucer. 

grynte, 
growede, 
stikede, 
wered{e), 


Modern  English 
Preterites. 


1.  grind,  grynte,  ground 

2.  grow,  growede,  grew. 

3.  stick,  stikede,  stuck. 

4.  wear,  wered{e),  wore. 

Any  such  examination  as  this  is  in  its  nature  partial 
and  incomplete  ;  but  it  is  sufficient  to  prove  the  truth 
of  the  general  statement  made  in  regard  to  the  influ- 
ence of  literature  in  arresting  the  transition  of  verbs 
from  the  strong  to  the  weak  conjugation.^    This  point, 

'  As  Chaucer  manuscripts  vary  to  some  extent  in  the  form  of  the  pret- 
erites of  verbs,  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  state  that  the  results  given  above  are 
based  upon  an  examination  of  the  Harleian  MS.,  No.  7,334»  edited  by  Thomas 
Wright. 


122  English  Language, 

indeed,  needed  to  be  presented  sharply,  because  there 
is  a  common  impression  that  the  strong  verbs  are  dis- 
appearing from  our  tongue.  The  impression,  however, 
is  an  entirely  mistaken  one.  None  of  the  strong  verbs 
that  were  left  us  at  the  end  of  the  Middle  English 
period,  more  than  three  hundred  years  ago,  have  since 
been  lost,  though,  in  a  few  cases,  weak  preterite  forms 
have  arisen  since,  or,  rather,  have  perpetuated  them- 
selves alongside  of  the  strong  forms.  In  fact,  the  re- 
verse of  the  common  impression  is  the  truth ;  for  a  few 
weak  verbs  have,  in  the  Modern  tongue,  passed  over 
to  the  strong  conjugation.  Even  a  certain  number 
of  anomalous  verbs  of  the  weak  conjugation  have 
successfully  resisted  the  tendency,  once  prevalent,  to 
inflect  them  regularly.  Reach,  to  be  sure,  has  gi^^en 
up  its  older  preterite,  r aught ;  but,  on  the  other  hand, 
words  like  teach,  catch,  and  tell,  still  prefer  their  pret- 
erites taught,  caught,  and  told,  to  the  forms  teached^ 
catched,  and  telled,  which  have  at  times  been  in  use. 

These  were  the  main  changes  that  took  place  dur- 
ing the  Middle  English  period,  as  the  result  of  the 
two  influences  that  are  always  at  work  upon  cultivated 
speech.  One  addition  to  the  inflectional  system  of 
the  verb,  and  one  loss,  are  also  to  be  noted  as  having 
characterized  the  history  of  the  language  during  these 
two  centuries. 

The  addition  was  in  the  shape  of  a  new  method  to 
express  the  relation  of  present  and  past  time.  The 
phrases  compounded  of  parts  of  the  verb  be  and 
the  present  participle,  such  for  illustration,  as  /  am 


Changes  in  the  Middle  English  Period.    123 

going,  and  /  was  going,  had  been  in  common  use 
from  the  earhest  period  of  the  language.  During  the 
Middle  Enghsh  period  were  established,  also,  the 
phrases  for  the  present  and  the  past  tense,  formed  by 
compounding  do  and  did  with  the  infinitive,  as  in  /  do 
go,  I  did  go.  They  did  not,  to  be  sure,  make  then 
their  first  appearance  in  our  speech ;  but  it  was  not 
until  the  beginning  of  the  fifteenth  century  that  they 
became  common,  and  not  until  the  end  of  it  that  they 
became  general. 

The  loss  was  the  plural  form  of  the  imperative 
mood.  Originally  this  mood  had  two  distinct  forms 
for  the  second  person  of  the  singular  and  for  that  of 
the  plural;  thus,  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  verb  helpan, 
*to  help,'  the  form  used  in  the  imperative  would 
always  be  help,  whenever  a  single  person  was  ad- 
dressed j  whenever  more  than  one,  the  form  would  be 
helpath,  which  in  later  English  would  become  and  did 
become  helpeth.  In  the  fourteenth  century  the  two 
forms  had  largely  come  to  be  confounded ;  and  by 
the  end  of  the  fifteenth  the  plural  ending  {e)th  had 
disappeared  altogether. 

The  Middle  English  period  saw,  also,  the  final  aban- 
donment of  the  grammatical  gender,  and  the  substitu- 
tion, in  its  place,  of  one  corresponding  to  the  natural 
distinctions  of  sex.  This  was  the  result  of  processes 
that  had  been  steadily  at  work  since  the  Norman 
conquest.  In  Anglo-Saxon  the  gender  of  the  noun 
depended  not  upon  its  meaning,  but  upon  its  ter- 
mination, or  method  of  inflection.     Objects  with  life 


124  English  Language. 

were,  in  consequence,  sometimes  neuter;  while  faf 
more  frequently  objects  without  life  were  masculine  or 
feminine.  The  early  language  presents  us  in  this 
respect  the  same  characteristic  as  the  other  tongues 
of  the  Indo-European  family,  such,  for  instance,  as 
Latin,  Greek,  or  the  modern  German.  Thus,  in  Anglo- 
Saxon,  wif, '  woman,'  '  wife,'  was  neuter.  Again,  7;«/S, 
*  mouth,'  and  to^,  '  tooth,'  were  masculine ;  tiinge, 
'  tongue,'  and  nasii,  '  nose,'  were  feminine ;  edge, 
*eye,'  and  edre,  'ear,'  were  neuter.  It  is  evident 
that  the  system  of  denoting  gender,  whatever  it  may 
have  been  at  the  beginning,  had  now  become  a  purely 
conventional  one  ;  and  one  great  compensation  for  the 
loss  of  inflection  was,  that  with  it  this  system  neces- 
sarily disappeared.  A  gender  which  depended  upon 
differences  of  termination  and  declension  could  not 
continue  to  flourish  after  those  differences  had  been 
swept  away ;  and,  when  to  this  loss  was  added  the  still 
more  important  loss  of  the  inflection  of  the  adjective 
and  the  adjective  pronouns,  every  method  of  denoting 
it  was  gone.  The  consequence  was,  that  it  was  the 
meaning  that  decided  the  gender  to  which  the  noun 
should  be  ascribed ;  and  this  necessarily  brought  the 
gender  into  harmony  with  the  real  distinctions  of  sex. 
The  breaking-down  of  the  grammatical  system  began 
immediately  after  the  conquest.  The  substitution  of 
the  natural  system  may  be  said  to  have  been  mainly 
effected  before  the  beginning  of  the  Middle  English 
period ;  by  the  end  of  it,  the  change  had  become 
perfectly  established.     Since  that  time,  it  is  only  in 


Changes  in  the  Middle  English  Period.    125 

the  language  of  poetry,  or  of  passion,  affectionate 
or  inimical  in  its  character,  that  objects  without  life 
are  personified,  or  objects  with  life  are  spoken  of  as 
things ;  nor  would  even  this  be  possible,  had  not  a 
few  of  the  pronouns  still  retained  a  separate  inflection 
for  distinction  of  sex. 


OF   THE  ^ 

71ESTTV 


CHAPTER  VIII. 
MODERN  ENGLISH. 

"Up  to  this  time  in  the  nomenclature  of  the  periods 
of  the  Enghsh  tongue,  and  in  the  dates  assigned  to 
them,  there  has  been  among  scholars  a  wide  diversity 
of  usage.  In  regard  to  the  latest  period,  however, 
there  is  a  pretty  substantial  agreement.  The  begin- 
ning of  Modern  English  is  by  most  writers  referred  to 
the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  century-;  by  some  it  is 
specifically  reckoned  from  the  accession  of  Queen 
Ehzabeth,  which  took  place  in  1558. 

No  dates  can  ever  be  given  in'  the  history  of  the 
development  of  any  tongue,  against  which  some  ob- 
jections cannot  be  brought.  For  convenience  of 
reference,  a  further  subdivision  of  Modern  English  is 
desirable.  In  this  work  it  will  be  separated  into  the 
three  following  periods.  The  first  extends  from  1550 
to  the  year  of  the  restoration  of  the  Stuarts  in  the  fol- 
lowing century,  that  is  to  1660 ;  the  second,  from  1660 
to  a  point  in  the  latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
and  in  this  the  year  1789,  the  date  of  the  breaking  out 
126 


Modern  English.  127 

of  the  French  Revolution,  affords  a  convenient  ter- 
minus; the  third  period  extends  from  1789  to  the 
present  time.  Though  the  divison  is  made  primarily 
for  convenience  of  reference,  it  will  be  found,  that,  on 
the  whole,  it  is  a  satisfactory  division  for  the  historical 
treatment  of  both  the  language  and  the  literature. 

It  has  been  pointed  out  in  the  previous  chapter, 
that,  in  highly-cultivated  tongues,  changes  in  gram- 
mar always  take  place  slowly ;  while  changes  in  vo- 
cabulary, particularly  in  the  nature  of  additions  to  it, 
meet  with  no  opposition,  or  with  comparatively  little. 
In  early  speech,  men  think  mainly  of  what  they  are 
going  to  say,  not  of  the  way  in  which  they  are  to  say 
it ;  and  the  hearer  or  reader  likewise  cares  so  much 
more  for  the  matter,  that  he  does  not  consciously  give 
much  heed  to  the  manner.  In  later  times  all  this  is 
reversed.  The  vehicle  of  the  thought  has  then  become 
a  subject  of  consideration  independent  of  the  thought ; 
that  is,  language  has  begun  to  be  studied  for  itself,  as 
well  as  for  what  it  conveys.  When  any  tongue  has 
reached  this  point  of  development,  the  opposition 
to  change  in  established  forms  of  expression  is  sure 
to  become  exceedingly  powerful ;  for  against  such 
changes  are  arrayed  all  the  authority  of  past  usage, 
and  all  the  prejudice  in  favor  of  what  actually  is  ex- 
isting, and  has  been  found  to  do,  though  perhaps 
clumsily,  the  work  demanded  of  it.  In  fact,  it  may  be 
said  that  these  changes  never  succeed  in  making 
themselves  adopted,  until  the  necessity  for  them  is 
imperious  enough  to  over-ride  the  protests  of  profes- 


128  Ejtglish  Language, 

sional  purists,  and  the  feeling  of  dislike  to  innova- 
tion which  becomes  almost  a  second  nature  in  the 
cultivated  users  of  speech. 

True  as  these  statements  are  of  any  tongue,  they 
are  especially  true  of  Modern  English.  While  the 
lexical  changes  have  been  comparatively  numerous, 
both  in  the  meanings  given  to  old  words  and  in  the 
actual  introduction  of  entirely  new  words,  the  gram- 
matical changes  have  been  on  a  very  limited  scale. 
In  the  inflection  of  the  noun  there  have  been  none 
at  all;  in -the  adjective  there  could  be  none,  because, 
at  the  beginning  of  the  Modern  English  period,  it  had 
already  been  reduced  to  the  root  form.  In  the  pro- 
noun and  the  verb  there  have  taken  place  certain 
changes,  and  of  these  an  account  of  the  most  impor- 
tant will  now  be  given. 

Inflection  of  the  Pronoun. — The  latter  half 
of  the  sixteenth  century  witnessed  the  rise,  or  at  least 
the  general  prevalence,  of  a  confusion  in  the  use  of 
the  nominative  and  objective  cases  of  the  personal 
pronouns  and  of  the  interrogative  who,  which  in  some 
instances  has  been  perpetuated  to  our  time  in  litera- 
ture, and  in  many  more  still  survives  in  colloquial 
speech.  Ye,  for  illustration,  in  the  language  of  Chau- 
cer, invariably  denotes  the  nominative ;  you,  the  objec- 
tive ;  and  this  distinction  will  still  be  found  observed 
in  the  authorized  version  of  the  Bible.  But  in  the 
sixteenth  century  this  distinction  began  to  break  down, 
and  before  the  first  period  of  Modern  English  was 
completed  the  two  forms  were   used  interchangeably 


Modern  English.  129 

for  each  other.  At  the  present  time  the  original 
nominative  ye,  though  occasionally  found,  is  practi- 
cally supplanted  by  the  form  you,  which  originally 
belonged  only  to  the  dative  and  to  the  accusative. 
But,  besides  this,  colloquial  speech,  and  to  no  slight 
extent  literature,  have  preserved  and  perpetuated  to 
our  time  expressions  in  which  /  and  vie,  he  and  hint, 
who  and  whom,  and  several  others,  are  confounded 
with  each  other,  and  furnish  a  vast  field  for  never- 
ending  discussions  as  to  correctness  of  usage. 

Of  all  the  parts  of  speech  the  pronoun  is  the  most 
adverse  to  the  introduction  of  any  new  forms ;  yet  to 
its  limited  number  the  close  of  the  sixteenth  century 
saw  the  addition  of  its.  The  genitive  of  //  (originally 
hii)  is  etymologically  his  ;  but  this  is  also  the  genitive 
of  he.  It  was  inevitable  that  confusion  should  arise 
in 'the  use  of  this  one  form  as  applied  equally  to  an 
object  with  life  ^nd  to  one  without  life,  as  soon  as 
the  system  of  grammatical  gender  had  passed  away. 
Confusion  did  arise ;  and  expedients  of  all  kinds 
were  resorted  to  for  the  sake  of  securing  clearness. 
Sometimes,  as  is  the  case  in  the  English  Bible,  of 
it  and  thereof  were  used ;  somxCtimes  the  was  em- 
ployed, as  in  this  example  from  Bacon,  "that  which 
retaineth  the  state  and  virtue ; "  and,  more  frequently 
still,  //  was  used  itself  as  a  genitive.  Both  tlie  and  // 
were  very  commonly  joined  with  own,  making  such 
'phrases  as  the  own  and  //  own.  The  most  usual 
method  to  avoid  ambiguity  was,  however,  to  change 
the  construction  of  the  sentence.     All  these  difficulties 


130  Ejtglish  La7tguage. 

led  to  the  formation  of  its.  The  first  record  of  ita 
appearance  in  print  that  has  yet  been  found  b(jlongs 
to  the  year  1598;  and  its  infrequency  is  made  con- 
spicuous by  the  fact  that  it  appears  but  ten  times  in 
Shakspeare's  works.  With  Ben  Jonson  it  is  much 
more  common,  and  by  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth 
century  it  had  become  thoroughly  established ;  though 
the  fact  that  Milton  uses  it  but  three  times  in  his  poe- 
try, and  rarely  in  his  prose,  shows  that  in  the  minds 
of  some  there  was  a  prejudice  still  lingering  against 
it.  By  the  end  of  that  century,  however,  its  com- 
paratively recent  origin  seems  to  have  been  entirely 
forgotten. 

Inflection  of  the  Verb.  —  In  the  verb  the  in- 
flectional changes  have  been  of  more  importance. 
One  of  them  is  purely  special.  This  is  the  transition 
of  the  form  be  of  the  substantive  verb  from  the  indica- 
tive to  the  subjunctive  mood.  In  Ehzabethan  Eng- 
lish they  be  is  found  constantly  alongside  of  they 
are ;  just  as  it  is  yet,  in  those  two  great  conservators 
of  archaic  expression,  —  the  language  of  poetry  -and 
of  low  life.  In  the  latter  it  still  occurs  constantly,  in 
the  former  occasionally ;  but  it  early  began,  in  literary 
prose,  to  be  confined  to  the  subjunctive  mood ;  and 
this  has  now  become  the  established  practice  in  the 
ordinary  cultivated  speech. 

A  second  change  has  been  the  gradual  substitution' 
of  -s  for  -th  as  the  termination  of  the  third  person 
singular  of  the  present  indicative.     In  the  Midland 
dialect  of  the  eastern  counties,  from  which   literary 


Modem  Eftglisk.  131 

English  directly  sprang,  this  part  of  the  verb  ended 
invariably  in  -th :  such  was  the  practice  of  Chaucer 
and  his  contemporaries,  and  their  very  occasional  use 
of  the  jform  in  -s  is  due  generally  to  the  desire  of 
accommodating  the  rhyme.  On  th§  other  hand,  this 
third  person  regularly  ended  in  -s  in  the  Northern 
dialect.  From  this  dialect  it  began  to  make  its  way 
into  literary  English  in  the  former  half  of  the  sixteenth 
century.  The  practice  of  employing  it  became  more 
and  more  prevalent,  and  by  the  end  of  that  century 
it  is  found,  at  least  in  some  writers,  full  as  frequently 
as  the  form  in  -th.  During  most  of  the  first  period  of 
Modern  English  the  terminations  -s  and  -th  flourished 
side  by  side,  neither  seeming  to  have  any  preference 
in  popular  estimation ;  but,  toward  the  latter  part  of 
it,  the  former  ending  became  the  one  generally  used, 
and  with  the  progress  of  time  gradually  displaced  the 
other.  That-the  termination  -th  did  not  die  entirely  is 
probably  due  to  the  influence  of  the  English  Bible. 
Though  the  authorized  version  of  that  work  appeared 
as  late  as  161 1,  the  language  used  in  it  belonged,  as 
is  well  known,  to  the  early  portion  of  the  preceding 
century.  In  it  the  ending  is  throughout  in  -th :  it 
never,  for  instance,  says  he  makes,  but  invariably  he 
maketh.  To  this  is  due  the  preservation  of  the  form, 
and  the  additional  fact  that  it  is  now  almost  entirely 
confined  to  the  language  of  religion. 

There  is  nothing  more  supremely  characteristic  of 
our  speech,  especially  in  its  later  periods,  than  the 
extent  to  which  it  has  developed  the  use  of  passive- 


132  English  Language. 

formations.  In  this  respect  it  has  gone  far  beyond 
any  other  cultivated  modern  tongue.  The  discussion 
of  this  belongs  mostly  to  syntax,  and  needs  here  noth- 
ing beyond  simple  reference.  But  the  tendency  in 
this  direction  which  the  language  has  long  manifested, 
has  had,  as  one  result,  the  addition,  during  the  past 
hundred  years,  of  entirely  new  verb-phrases,  made  up 
of  the  present  and  past  tenses  of  the  substantive 
verb,  and  of  past  participles  compounded  with  being. 
The  history  of  this  presents  a  striking  instance  of  the 
difficulty  in  which  the  decay  of  old  forms  leaves  a 
language,  and  the  ingenuity  it  displays  in  striking  out 
new  paths  to  expression. 

Anglo-Saxon  had  no  special  form  for  the  passive; 
and,  to  represent  the  present  of  that  voice,  it  combined 
the  past  participle  with  the  present  tense  of  either  the 
verbs  wesan  and  bean,  '  to  be,'  or  the  verb  weor^an, 
*to  become,'  preserved  in  early  English  in  the  form 
worth{eii).  But  the  latter  word,  in  process  of  time, 
disappeared  from  the  language,  and  the  tenses  of  the 
substantive  verb  became  the  only  ones  that  were  com- 
bined with  the  past  participle  to  express  the  passive 
relation. 

■  This  it  could  easily  do  for  the  present  tense,  when 
the  verb  whose  participle  was  used  denoted  a  feeling 
which  was  in  its  nature  continuous.  'The  man  is 
loved,  is  feared,  is  admired,'  were  expressions  which 
presented  no  difficulty  nor  ambiguity ;  but,  when  the 
verb  whose  participle  was  used  denoted  a  simple  act, 
the  combination   of  the    passive   participle  with   the 


Modern  English.  133 

present  tense  of  the  verb  be  had  the  effect  of  giv 
ing  to  the  full  verbal  phrase,  not  the  sense  of  some- 
thing which  was  then  actually  taking  place,  but  of 
something  which  had  already  taken  place.  It  was  a 
completed,  not  an  ^existing  action,  which  was  signified 
by  it.  '  The  man  is  shot,  is  wounded,  is  killed,'  could 
not  well  be  employed  of  any  thing  else  than  a  finished 
result,  not  of  an  action  going  on  to  a  possible  result. 
And  when  the  principal  verb  denoted,  according  to 
the  context,  as  in  many  cases  it  did,  sometimes  a 
completed,  and  sometimes  continuous  action,  another 
source  of  ambiguity  was  at  once  added. 

One  way  taken  to  avoid  the  difficulty  was  to  change 
the  form  of  expression.  In  order  to  assert,  for  illus- 
tration, that  an  individual  was  in  danger  of  violent 
death,  inversions  like  '  they  are  killing  the  man  '  were 
introduced.  In  fact,  either  changing  the  expression, 
or  the  employment  of  various  circumlocutions,  became 
the  common  way  of  getting  rid  of  the  ambiguity. 
Another  method,  however,  sprang  up,  though  its  use 
was  comparatively  limited  :  this  was  to  join  the  pres- 
ent of  the  verb  be,  almost  always  when  the  subject 
was  without  life,  to  the  verbal  substantive  in  ing, 
governed  by  the  preposition  on  or  in.  The  preposi- 
tion, in  time,  took  the  form  of  a,  or,  rather,  was  cor- 
rupted into  it  by  slovenly  pronunciation,  and  was  then 
frequently  joined  directly  to  the  substantive.  In  this 
way  arose  expressions  like  '  the  house  is  a-build- 
ing,'  *the  brass  is  a-forging,'  ^the  dinner  is  a-prepar- 
ing ; '  and  from   the   substantive  finally  fell  away  the 


134  English  La?tguage. 

preposition,  leaving  the  verbal  phrase  designed  to 
denote  the  passive  relation  precisely  the  same  in  form 
as  the  verbal  phrase  compounded  of  the  substantive 
verb  and  the  present  participle.  The  former,  in  fact, 
were  necessarily  limited  in  numbed ;  for  it  was  rarely 
the  case  that  a  subject  with  life  could  be  given  to  the 
verbal  phrase  representing  the  passive.  In  '  the  house 
is  building,'  and  'the  man  is  building,'  it  is  obvious 
at  a  glance  that  the  idea  conveyed  by  is  building  is 
essentially  distinct.  Nor  would  the  difficulty  have  been 
removed,  had  the  preposition  been  retained.  'The 
man  is  a-eating '  could  not  by  any  possibility  be  looked 
upon  as  a  passive  formation,  and  made  to  mean  that 
the  subject  of  the  verb  was  the  object  of  the  action 
signified  by  the  verbal  substantive. 

Some  other  method  of  expression  was  felt  to  be 
necessary :  accordingly,  in  the  latter  half  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century,  a  new  verb-phrase,  made  up  of  the 
substantive  verb  and  the  compound  past  participle, 
came  into  being.  Like  the  forms  compounded  with 
do,  these  phrases  were  confined  to  the  present  and 
preterite  tenses.  Their  use  speedily  became  common  ; 
and  though  they  met  with  vigorous  opposition,  they 
were  found  so  clear  in  meaning,  and  so  convenient  in 
practice,  that  opposition  was  of  no  avail.  They  have 
been  adopted  by  nearly  every  living  writer  of  repute, 
and  may  now  be  considered  thoroughly  established. 
Double  methods  of  expression,  like  '  the  house  is  build- 
ing,' and  '  the  house  is  being  built,'  will  in  some  cases 
doubtless,  continue  to  exist  side  by  side  for  a  long 


Modern  English,  135 

time  to  come ;  but  no  new  ones  of  the  former  kind 
will  make  their  way  into  general  use,  while  there  is  no 
perceptible  limit  to  the  spread  of  those  of  the  latter. 

These  constitute  the  important  inflectional  changes 
that  have  taken  place  in  Modern  English.  There  are 
other  grammatical  changes,  mostly  syntactical  in  their 
nature,  into  which  the  limits  of  this  work  do  not  suffer 
us  to  enter.  The  character  of  them  may  be  gathered 
from  one  or  two  illustrations.  The  form  of  the  sub- 
junctive mood  still  continues  to  exist  in  our  tongue ; 
but  the  use  of  that  mood  as  conveying  any  shades  of 
meaning  distinct  from  that  of  the  indicative  passed 
away  in  the  Middle  English  period.  So,  also,  in  the 
first  period  of  Modern  English,  the  double  negative, 
as  strengthening  the  negation,  was  abandoned  under 
the  influence  of  the  Latin,  in  which  two  negatives 
make  an  affirmative  ;  but,  though  given  up  in  the  cul- 
tivated speech,  the  original  idiom  exhibits  all  its  early 
vitality  in  the  language  of  low  Hfe.  Questions  like 
these,  connected  with  the  history  of  usage,  would 
require  a  special  work  for  their  proper  discussion. 

It  is  in  the  vocabulary  that  the  greatest  changes 
have  taken  place,  and  are  still  taking  place,  in  Modern 
Enghsh ;  though  they  have  never  been  of  such  a  kind 
and  extent  as  to  affect  radically  the  character  and 
continuity  of  the  speech.  In  general  terms,  it  may 
be  said  that  the  losses  in  words  have  been  compara- 
tively slight ;  while  the  gains  have  been  numerous  :  but 
these  gains  are  far  from  having  been  spread  equally 
over  the  history  of  the  modern  tongue.    The  period 


1^6  English  Language. 

from  1550  to  1660  is  especially  remarkable  for  the 
vast  number  of  terms  that  came  into  the  language, 
especially  from  the  Latin,  and  to  some,  though  to  a 
much  slighter  degree,  from  the  French,  the  Spanish, 
and  the  Italian.  The  disposition  to  introduce  these 
foreign  words  had  begun  in  the  early  part  of  the  six- 
teenth century ;  but  it  did  not  get  under  full  headway 
until  the  latter  half.  It  was  a  natural  result  of  the 
causes  then  in  operation.  It  was  a  time  of  great 
activity  and  intense  excitement.  The  intellectual  im- 
pulse which  had  been  set  in  motion  by  the  revival 
of  letters  was  still  in  its  first  vigor.  It  had  rent  the 
Christian  Church  into  two  hostile  camps,  using  against 
each  other,  in  defence  of  their  dogmas,  all  the  re- 
sources of  the  common  learning  of  the  past  and  the 
ndw  learning  that  was  coming  in.  A  world  hitherto 
unknown  had  been  laid  open  to  view,  and  fresh  explo- 
rations were  constantly  bringing  to  light  fresh  facts. 
The  rapid  increase  of  knowledge  and  of  the  develop- 
ment of  thought  needed  new  words  for  their  expres- 
sion ;  and  new  words  were  accordingly  introduced  with- 
out stint  or  hesitation.  The  readiest  resource  at  that 
tjme,  of  the  English-speaking  race,  was  the  Latin  ;  and 
there  was  scarcely  a  single  author  of  that  period  who 
did  not  feel  himself  at  perfect  liberty  to  coin  from  it 
any  terms  which  seemed  to  him  to  express  more 
exactly  the  ideas  he  sought  to  convey.  The  conse- 
quence was,  that  vast  multitudes  of  words  came  then 
into  our  tongue,  large  numbers  of  which  have  never 
been  collected  into  our  dictionaries,  and  perhaps,  in 


Modern  English.  137 

some  cases,  have  never  had  any  existence  outside  of 
the  written  speech.  Certainly  many  of  them  never 
came  into  general  use,  and  no  small  proportion  of  them 
were  probably  confined  to  the  individual  authors  who 
invented  them.  In  conformity  with  the  terminology 
previously  used,  this  influx  is  often  called  the  "Latin 
of  the  Fourth  Period." 

But,  at  the  time  of  the  restoration  of  the  Stuarts, 
the  intellectual  nnpulse  above  mentioned  had  practi- 
cally spent  its  force.  The  period  from  1660  to  1789 
was  a  critical  rather  than  a  creative  age ;  and  it  added 
but  a  small  amount  to  the  English  vocabulary.  This 
state  of  things,  however,  was  again  broken  up  towards 
the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century.  A  great  political 
and  humanitarian  movement  v>^as  in  progress  through- 
out Europe,  which  was  attended,  not  merely  with  a 
social  upheaval,  but  with  a  general  intellectual  move- 
ment, which  presents  many  striking  resemblances  to 
that  of  the  sixteenth  century.  As  regards  language, 
it  has  been  followed  by  two  results.  During  the 
past  hundred  years,  our  tongue  has  shown  a  marked 
tendency  to  go  back  to  its  older  forms,  and  to  revive 
a  large  number  of  words  that  have  been  kept  alive 
OQly  in  the  provincial  dialects ;  and  this  is  a  ten- 
dency which  the  constantly-increasing  attention  paid 
to  the  study  of  English  in  its  earlier  stages  will  natu- 
rally accelerate.  The  second  result  is  the  introduction 
of  a  vast  number  of  new  words,  which  the  rapid  ad- 
vance in  every  department  of  human  investigation  haa 
rendered  necessary.     Many  of  these,  to  be  sure,  are 


138  English  Language. 

nothing  but  revivals  of  terms  which  had  previously 
been  brought  in  during  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth 
centuries,  but  had  fallen  into  disuse;  but  much  the 
larger  proportion  of  them  are  entirely  new  coinages. 
Especially  is  this  true  in  the  manifold  departments  of 
modern  science,  in  which  every  advance  gives  birth  to 
a  number  of  hitherto  unknown  words.  These,  in  most 
instances,  are  taken  from  the  Greek.  To  a  large  ex- 
tent they  are  purely  technical  in  their  character ;  but, 
with  the  progress  of  the  arts,  a  certain  number  are  sure 
to  pass  into  general  circulation.  Still,  in  spite  of  these 
vast  accessions,  very  few  old  words  that  were  ever  in 
common  use  have  been  lost ;  nor  do  they,  to  any  great 
extent,  suffer  change  of  meaning.  The  continued  and 
indeed  ever-increasing  popularity  of  the  great  writers 
of  Modern  English  is  sufficient  to  prevent  the  terms 
they  use  from  becoming  obsolete,  or  the  language 
itself  to  wander  far  away  from  the  forms  which  they 
have  made  familiar. 

The  fact  of  English  possessing,  to  a  large  extent,  a 
double  vocabulary  —  one  composed  of  Teutonic,  the 
other  of  Romance  words  —  has  given  a  marked  charac- 
ter to  the  literature  of  various  epochs.  Still,  at  any  time, 
a  difference  of  terms  employed  will  always  be  due  to  a 
difference  of  subject.  It  has  already  been  pointed 
out,  that  the  language  of  reasoning  and  philosophy,  of 
intellectual  processes  of  any  kind,  will  always  makj 
extensive  use  of  the  Latin  element ;  while,  on  the  con- 
trary, the  language  of  feeling,  in  whatever  shape  mani- 
fested, will  be  mainly  taken  from  the  Teutonic  element. 


Modern  English.  139 

But,  even  in  treating  of  subjects  of  a  similar  character, 
different  writers  living  at  the  same  time  will  vary  widely 
in  their  choice  of  words.  Moreover,  it  may  be  said 
that  the  literary  speech  has  shown  a  constant  tendency 
to  oscillate  between  the  two  vocabularies.  During  the 
first  period,  from  1550  to  1660,  the  Latin  influence 
was  plainly  predominant.  It  affected,  not  alone  the 
words,  but  also  the  construction.  The  involved  and 
stately  sentences  of  Bacon,  Hooker,  and  Milton,  belong 
to  a  species  of  wTiting  which  is  no  more  cultivated : 
indeed,  it  is  only  in  the  dramatists  of  the  Elizabethan 
age,  that  any  thing  closely  resembling  modern  prose 
can  then  be  found.  In  the  second  period,  the  two 
elements  of  the  vocabulary  were,  in  the  main,  harmo- 
niously blended,  though  during  the  latter  part  of  it, 
under  the  influence  of  Johnson,  a  temporary  re-action 
manifested  itself  in  favor  of  the  Latin.  But  this 
speedily  passed  away.  On  the  other  hand,  during  the 
last  period  of  Modern  English,  and  especially  at  the 
present  time,  a  violent  re-action  in  favor  of  the  Teu- 
tonic element  has  set  in ;  so  that,  in  spite  of  the  im- 
mense accessions  to  the  vocabulary  from  the  classical 
tongues,  due  to  the  progress  of  science,  it  is  probably 
true  that  the  proportion  of  words  of  native  origin  used 
by  popular  writers,  as  contrasted  with  those  of  foreign 
origin,  is  greater  now  than  at  any  tim6  during  the 
past  three  hundred  years.  But  the  history  of  the  lan- 
guage shows  that  there  is  nothing  permanent  about 
any  of  these  movements,  whether  in  favor  of  the  Teu- 
tonic or  of  the  Romance  element  of  our  tongue.     Both 


X40  English  Language. 

are  essential  to  the  speech  in  its  present  form,  and  a 
marked  preference  for  the  one,  to  the  exclusion  of  the 
other,  can,  at  best,  be  never  any  thing  more  than  a 
temporary  fashion. 

Settlement  of  the  Orthography.  —  It  was  in 
the  second  period  of  Modern  English,  that  the  orthog- 
raphy became  fixed.  In  the  time  of  Chaucer  it  may 
fairly  be  described  as  phonetic ;  so  that,  as  pronuncia- 
tion varied  in  different  parts  of  the  country,  the  spell- 
ing necessarily  varied  with  it.  One  of  the  results  of 
the  art  of  printing  was  to  bring  about  uniformity  on 
this  point.  It  was,  however,  a  result  that  was  very 
gradually  reached.  The  seventeenth  century  showed 
a  marked  advance  toward  uniformity  over  the  six- 
teenth ;  and  still  more  decided  was  tha  advance  of  the 
latter  part  of  the  seventeenth  century  over  the  earlier 
part.  At  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century  the 
present  orthography  was  pretty  nearly  established ; 
though  in  regard  to  numerous  words  there  was  still 
wide  diversity  of  usage.  It  was  not  until  after  the 
publication  of  Johnson's  dictionary,  in  1755,  that  the 
existing  spelling  can  be  said  to  have  become  univer- 
sally received.  That  given  by  him  to  words  has  been 
the  one  generally  followed  by  all  later  writers ;  and 
a  deference  has  sprung  up  for  it  which  is  not  justified 
by  any  thing  in  its  character.  Orthography  was  a 
matter  about  which  Johnson  was  totally  incompetent 
to  decide  ;  and,  largely  in  consequence  of  the  respect 
and  even  reverence  paid  still  to  that  which  he  saw  fit 
to  employ,  the  spelling  of  English  is  probably  the  most 


Modern  English.  141 

M(^ious  to  be  found  in  any  cultivated  tongue  that  ever 
existed.  It  is  in  no  sense  a  guide  to  pronunciation, 
which  is  its  only  proper  office ;  and,  even  for  deriva- 
tion (an  office  for  which  it  was  never  designed) ,  it  is 
equally  worthless,  save  in  the  case  of  words  of  direct 
Latin  origin. 

Wide  Extension  of  English.  —  During  the 
modern  period  of  its  history,  English  has  been  carried 
over  a  large  shai2  of  the  habitable  globe,  and  the  num- 
ber of  those  who  speak  it  is  constantly  increasing. 
Under  conditions  that  existed  in  former  times,  this 
fact  could  be  followed  but  by  one  result.  Different 
tongues  would  have  sprung  up  in  different  countries, 
varying  from  each  other,  and  varying  more  or  less 
from  their  common  mother ;  and  the  differences  would 
have  constantly  tended  to  become  more  marked  with 
the  progress  of  time.  But  there  are  two  agencies  now 
in  existence  that  will  be  more  than  sufficient  to  prevent 
any  such  result.  These  are,  first,  the  common  pos- 
session of  a  great  literature  accessible  to  men  of  every 
rank  and  every  country ;  and,  secondly,  the  constant 
interchange  of  population  that  results  from  the  facility 
of  modern  communication.  Joined  to  these  is  the 
steadily-increasing  attention  paid  to  the  diffusion  of 
education,  the  direct  effect  of  which  is  to  destroy  dia- 
lectic differences,  and  make  the  literary  speech  the  one 
standard  to  which  all  conform.  .These  agencies  become 
year  by  year  more  wide-reaching  and  controlling.  The 
forces  that  tend  to  bring  about  unity  are  now  so  much 
more  powerful  than  those  that  tend  to  bring  about 


142  English  Language. 

diversity,  and  the  former  are  so  constantl}'  gaining  in 
strength,  that  any  marked  deviation  between  the  lan- 
guage as  spoken  in  Great  Britain  and  in  its  Colonies, 
and  in  America,  can  now  be  looked  upon  as  hardly 
possible. 

This  brings  us  directly  to  the  discussion  of  a  ques- 
tion with  which  the  general  history  of  English  may 
properly  conclude  :  What  is  to  be  the  future  of  our 
tongue  ?  Is  it  steadily  tending  to  become  corrupt,  as 
constantly  asserted  by  so  many  who  are  laboriously 
devoting  their  Hves  to  preserve  it  in  its  purity  ?  The 
fact  need  not  be  denied,  if  by  it  is  meant,  that,  within 
certain  limits,  the  speech  is  always  moving  away  from 
established  usage.  The  history  of  language  is  the  his- 
tory of  corruption.  The  purest  of  speakers  uses  every 
day,  with  perfect  propriety,  words  and  forms,  which, 
looked  at  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  past,  are  im- 
proper, if  not  scandalous.  But  the  blunders  of  one 
age  become  good  usage  in  the  following,  and,  in  pro- 
cess of  time,  grow  to  be  so  consecrated  by  custom  and 
consent,  that  a  return  to  practices  theoretically  correct 
would  seem  like  a  return  to  barbarism.  While  this 
furnishes  no  excuse  for  lax  and  slovenly  methods  of 
expression,  it  is  a  guaranty  that  the  indulgence  in 
them  by  some,  or  the  adoption  of  them  by  all,  will  not 
necessarily  be  attended  by  any  serious  injury  to  the 
speech.  Vulgarity  and  tawdriness  and  affectation,  and 
numerous  other  characteristics  which  are  manifested 
by  the  users  of  language,  are  bad  enough  ;  but  it  is  a 
gross  error  to  suppose  that  they  have  of  themselves 


Modem  EnglUfi^  ^  ^  ^  ^  ^l^3j  ,j  ^ 

any  permanently  serious  effect  upon  the  purity  of 
national  speech.  They  are  results  of  imperfect  train- 
ing ;  and,  while  the  great  masters  continue  to  be 
admired  and  read  and  studied,  they  are  results  that 
last  but  for  a  time.  The  causes  which  bring  about  the 
decline  of  a  language  are  of  an  entirely  different  type. 
It  is  not  the  use  of  particular  words  or  idioms,  it  is  not 
the  adoption  of  peculiar  rhetorical  devices,  that  con- 
tribute either  to  the  permanent  well-being  or  corrup- 
tion of  any  tongue.  These  are  the  mere  accidents  of 
speech,  the  fashion  of  a  time  which  passes  away  with 
the  causes  that  gave  it  currency :  far  back  of  these  lie 
the  real  sources  of  decay.  Language  is  no  better  and 
no  worse  than  the  men  who  speak  it.  The  terms  of 
which  it  is  composed  have  no  independent  vitality  in 
themselves  :  it  is  the  meaning  which  the  men  who  use 
them  put  into  them,  that  gives  them  all  their  power. 
It  is  never  language  in  itself  that  becomes  weak  or 
corrupt:  it  is  only  when  those  who  use  it  become 
weak  or  corrupt,  that  it  shares  in  their  degradation. 
Nothing  but  respect  need  be  felt  or  expressed  for  that 
solicitude  which  strives  to  maintain  the  purity  of  speech  : 
yet  when  unaccompanied  by  a  far-reaching  knowledge 
of  its  history,  but,  above  all,  by  a  thorough  comprehen- 
sion of  the  principles  which  underlie  the  growth  of 
language,  efforts  of  this  kind  are  as  certain  to  be  full 
of  error  as  they  are  lacking  in  result.  There  has  nevei 
been  a  time  in  the  history  of  Modern  English  in  which 
there  have  not  been  men  who  fancied  that  they  fore- 
saw its  decay.     From  the  sixteenth  to  the  nineteenth 


144  English  Language. 

century  on,  our  literature,  whenever  it  touches  upon 
the  character  of  the  vehicle  by  which  it  is  conveyed, 
is  full  of  the  severest  criticism ;  and  its  pages  are 
crowded  with  unavailing  protests  against  the  introduc- 
tion of  that  which  now  it  hardly  seems  possible  for  us 
to  do  without,  and,  along  with  these,  with  mournful 
complaints  of  the  degeneracy  of  the  present,  and  with 
melancholy  forebodings  for  the  future.  So  it  always 
has  been  :  so  it  is  always  likely  to  be.  Yet  the  real 
truth  is,  that  the  language  can  be  safely  trusted  to  take 
care  of  itself,  if  the  men  who  speak  it  take  care  of 
themselves ;  for  with  their  degree  of  development,  of 
cultivation,  and  of  character,  it  will  always  be  found  in 
absolute  harmony. 

In  fact,  it  is  not  from  the  agencies  that  are  com- 
monly supposed  to  be  corrupting  that  our  speech  at 
the  present  time  suffers :  it  is  in  much  more  danger 
from  ignorant  efforts  made  to  preserve  what  is  called 
its  purity.  Rules  have  been  and  still  are  laid  down 
for  the  use  of  it,  which  never  had  any  existence  out- 
side of  the  minds  of  grammarians  and  verbal  critics. 
By  these  rules,  so  far  as  they  are  observed,  freedom  of 
expression  is  cramped,  idiomatic  peculiarity  destroyed^ 
and  false  tests  for  correctness  set  up,  which  give  the 
ignorant  opportunity  to  point  out  supposed  error  in 
others ;  while  the  real  error  lies  in  their  own  imperfect 
acquaintance  with  the  best  usage.  One  illustration 
will  be  sufiicient  of  multitudes  that  might  be  cited 
There  is  a  rule  of  Latin  syntax  that  two  or  more  sub- 
stantives joined  by  a  copulative  require  the  verb  to  be 


Modern  English.  145 

in  the  plural.  This  has  been  foisted  into  the  grammaf 
of  English,  of  which  it  is  no  more  true  than  it  is  of 
modern  German.  There  is  nothing  in  the  usage  of 
the  past,  from  the  very  earliest  times,  to  authorize  it, 
nothing  in  the  usage  of  the  present  to  justify  it,  except 
so  far  as  the  rule  itself  has  tended  to  make  general 
the  practice  it  imposes.  The  grammar  of  English,  as 
exhibited  in  the  utterances  of  its  best  writers  and 
speakers,  has,  from  the  very  earliest  period,  allowed 
the  widest  discretion  as  to  the  use  either  of  the  singu- 
lar or  the  plural  in  such  cases.  The  importation  and 
imposition  of  rules  foreign  to  its  idiom,  like  the  one 
just  mentioned,  does  more  to  hinder  the  free  develop- 
ment of  the  tongue,  and  to  dwarf  its  freedom  of  ex- 
pression, than  the  widest  prevalence  of  slovenliness  of 
speech,  or  of  affectation  of  style  ;  for  these  latter  are 
always  temporary  in  their  character,  and  are  sure  to  be 
left  behind  by  the  advance  in  popular  cultivation,  or 
forgotten  through  the  change  in  popular  taste. 

Of  the  languages  of  Christendom,  English  is  the  one 
now  spoken  by  far  the  largest  number  of  persons ;  and 
from  present  appearances  there  would  seem  to  be  but 
little  limit  to  its  possible  extension.  Yet  that  it  or  any 
other  tongue  will  ever  become  a  universal  language  is  so 
much  more  than  doubtful,  that  it  may  be  called  impos- 
sible ;  and,  even  were  it  possible,  it  is  a  question  if  it 
would  be  desirable.  However  that  may  be,  its  spread 
will  depend  in  the  future,  as  it  has  in  the  past,  not  so 
much  upon  the  character  of  the   language  itself,  as 


146  English  Language. 

upon  the  character  of  the  men  who  speak  it.  It  is 
not  necessarily  because  it  is  in  reahty  superior  to  other 
tongues,  that  it  has  become  more  widely  extended  than 
ihey,  but  because  it  has  been  and  still  is  the  speech  of 
tvvo  great  nations  which  have  been  among  the  fore- 
most in  civilization  and  power,  the  most  greedy  in  the 
grasping  of  territory,  the  most  successful  in  the  plant- 
ing of  colonies.  But  as  pohtical  reasons  have  lifted 
the  tongue  into  its  present  prominence,  so  in  the  future 
to  political  reasons  will  be  owing  its  progress  or  decay. 
I'hus,  back  of  every  thing  that  tends  to  the  extension 
of  language,  lie  the  material  strength,  the  intellectual 
development  and  the  moral  character,  which  make  the 
users  of  a  language  worthy  enough  and  powerful  enough 
to  impose  it  upon  others.  No  speech  can  do  more 
than  express  the  ideas  of  those  who  employ  it  at  the 
time.  It  cannot  Hve  upon  its  past  meanings,  or  upon 
the  past  conceptions  of  great  men  which  have  been 
recorded  in  it,  any  more  than  the  race  which  uses  it 
can  live  upon  its  past  glory  or  its  past  achievements. 
Proud,  therefore,  as  we  may  now  well  be  of  our  tongue, 
we  may  rest  assured,  that,  if  it  ever  attain  to  universal 
sovereignty,  it  will  do  so  only  because  the  ideas  of  the 
men  who  speak  it  are  fit  to  become  the  ruling  ideas  of 
the  world,  and  the  men  themselves  are  strong  enough 
to  carry  them  over  the  world ;  and  that,  in  the  last 
analysis,  depends,  like  every  thing  else,  upon  the  de- 
veloimient  of  the  individual ;  depends,  not.  upon  the 
territory  we  buy  or  steal,  not  upon  the  gold  we  mine, 
or  the  grain  we  grow,  but  upon  the  men  we  produce. 


Modern  English.  147 

If  we  fail  there,  no  national  greatness,  however  splen- 
did to  outward  view,  can  be  any  thing  but  temporary 
and  illusory ;  and,  when  once  national  greatness  dis- 
appears, no  past  achievements  in  literature,  however 
glorious,  will  perpetuate  our  language  as  a  living 
speech,  though  they  may  help  for  a  while  to  .retard  its 
decay. 


PART    II. 
HISTORY  OF  INFLECTIONS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

SOME    FEATURES   COMMON  TO  ALL  THE  TEU- 
TONIC  TONGUES. 

I .  He  who  contrasts  the  English  of  the  Anglo-Saxon 
period  with  the  English  of  to-day  is  at  once  struck  by 
the  difference  between  the  ancient  and  the  modern 
tongue  in  respect  to  vocabulary  and  to  inflection.  It 
is  with  the  latter  alone  that  we  have  to  do  in  the  fol- 
lowing pages ;  and  the  history  of  it  is  largely  a  record 
of  abandonment  of  forms  once  deemed  necessary,  and 
of  confusion  in  the  use  of  those  that  were  retained. 
Nevertheless,  it  would  be  a  great  error  to  suppose  that 
loss  or  change  of  inflection  is  especially  characteristic 
of  the  later  life  of  our  language  as  distinguished  from 
the  earlier.  Even  when  our  speech  made  its  first  ap- 
pearance in  a  few  wTitten  monuments  of  the  seventh 
and  eighth  centuries,  it  had  then  already  given  up 
much  that  once  belonged  to  it.  The  stripping  of  in- 
flections from  the  English  tongue  had  begun  long 
before  any  productions  which  have  been  handed  down 
had  been  composed  in  it.    Many  of  the  irregular  forms 

151 


152  English  Language. 

which  are  still  found  at  this  day  owe  their  existence, 
and  their  apparently  anomalous  character,  to  changes 
which  had  taken  place  before  a  word  of  our  language 
had  been  committed  to  writing;  in  periods,  indeed, 
when  we  have  not  the  slightest  knowledge  as  to  where 
even  the  men  lived  who  spoke  our  speech. 

2.  But,  without  the  aid  of  written  monuments,  how 
can  we  know  this  to  be  a  fact  ?  How  can  we  be  sure 
that  forms  once  existed  in  our  tongue  which  have 
never  been  presented  in  its  literature?  The  answer 
to  these  questions  not  only  renders  necessary  an  ac- 
count of  the  characteristics  of  the  inflections  perv^ading 
the  earliest  period  of  English,  but,  to  some  extent,  also 
an  examination  of  certain  features  which  are  common 
to  it  with  the  other  Teutonic  tongues.  Its  precise 
relations  to  them,  the  grammatical  peculiarities  which 
distinguished  them  all,  must  be  clearly  comprehended, 
before  the  student  can  understand  the  reason  of  the 
general  tendencies  which  have  manifested  themselves 
in  the  history  of  our  inflection,  or  the  origin  of  the 
particular  anomalies  which  are  still  retained  in  it. 

3.  It  has  already  been  stated  that  English  is  a 
member  of  a  family  of  languages,  called  the  Teutonic 
or  Germanic,  which  itself  forms  one  branch  of  a  still 
larger  family,  termed  the  Indo-European,  or  the 
Aryan. ^  All  the  tongues  belonging  to  the  latter  have 
come  from  the  same  source,  and  are,  therefore,  more  or 
less  remotely  allied  to  one  another.  But  as  no  record 
of  this  one  primitive  Indo-European  speech  exists,  as 

1  See  introductory  chapter. 


The  Primitive  Teutonic  Speech,        153 

no  monuments  of  it  have  been  preserved,  from  which 
its  words  and  forms  could  be  gathered,  we  are  under 
the  necessity  of  making  out  what  these  words  and 
forms  must  have  been,  by  a  comparison,  in  accordance 
with  certain  scientific  principles,  of  the  languages  that 
have  been  derived  from  this  unknown  original  tongue. 
Words  and  forms  which  are  common  to  all  its  de- 
scendants, it  is  very  safe  to  say,  must  have  existed  in 
the  parent-speech ;  though  naturally  they  are  more 
changed  and  disguised  in  appearance,  the  more 
remote  they  are  from  it  in  time.  Looked  at  from 
this  point  of  view,  it  may  be  said,  that,  as  a  general 
rule,  the  older  the  tongue,  the  more  likely  is  it  to  bear 
a  closer  resemblance  to  the  original  from  which  it 
came.  Accordingly,  Sanskrit,  with  a  hterature  going 
back  to  at  least  fifteen  hundred  years  before  Christ,  is 
conceded  to  be  much  nearer,  in  its  forms  and  inflec- 
tions, to  the  primitive  Indo-European,  than  any  of  its 
numerous  sister-languages. 

4.  In  the  same  manner,  as  regards  that  branch  of 
the  Indo-European  family  to  which  English  belongs, 
there  are  in  existence  no  monuments  of  that  primitive 
Teutonic  speech  from  which  the  members  of  that 
branch  have  descended.  The  words  and  forms  con- 
stituting it  can  only  be  made  out,  in  the  same  manner 
as  in  the  case  of  the  primitive  Indo-European,  by  a 
scientific  comparison  of  those  found  in  the  derived 
tongues.  Necessarily  the  older  languages  of  this 
branch,  monuments  of  which  have  been  handed  down, 
are  of  the  first  importance ;  and  of  these  the  Gothic, 


X54  English  Language. 

whose  scanty  literature  goes  back  to  the  fourth  century 
after  Christ,  must  be  regarded  as  presenting,  on  the 
whole,  much  the  nearest  likeness  to  that  theoretical 
primitive  Teutonic  speech  which  is  the  common  par- 
ent of  all.  But  the  other  older  languages  belonging 
to  this  sub-family  are  also  of  importance.  These  are 
the  Old  High  German,  the  Old  Norse,  and  the  three 
Low-Germanic  tongues,  the  Old  Saxon,  including  the 
Netherlandish,  the  Old  Frisian,  and  that  English  of 
the  earliest  period  which  has  had  given  to  it  in  ordi- 
nary usage  the  name  of  Anglo-Saxon. 

5.  All  of  these  tongues  had  many  things  in  com- 
mon ;  but  loss  of  inflection  not  only  characterized  the 
primitive  Teutonic  as  compared  with  the  primitive 
Indo-European,  but  also  characterized  the  members 
of  the  Teutonic  branch  as  compared  with  their  imme- 
diate parent.  But  some  of  these  six  oldest  tongues 
retained  more  than  others,  the  Gothic  naturally  far 
the  most  of  any.  Each  one  of  them,  however,  clung 
to  particular  forms  and  inflections  which  the  others 
had  partly  or  wholly  given  up.  Before  considering 
the  special  later  history  of  English,  it  is  therefore 
desirable  to  point  out  some  general  resemblances  which 
existed  between  it  in  its  earliest  form,  and  the  sister- 
languages  of  the  same  Teutonic  branch.  Under- 
standing the  common  basis  from  which  they  started, 
the  later  relations  of  each  to  the  others  not  only  be- 
come at  once  much  clearer,  but  the  later  history  of 
our  tongue  has  light  thrown  upon  it  by  the  develop- 
ment which  has  characterized  the  others.    We  shall,  in 


Case  in  the  Primitive  Teutonic.        155 

this  place,  limit  ourselves  to  the  general  features  thai 
characterize  the  inflection  of  the  noun,  the  adjective, 
and  the  pronoun,  in  order  to  make  plain  the  loss  sus- 
tained by  the  primitive  Teutonic  as  compared  with 
the  primitive  Indo-European,  and  further  the  loss  of 
the  English  as  compared  with  the  parent  Teutonic. 
The  characteristics  of  the  verb,  so  far  as  they  are 
examined  at  all,  will  be  discussed  by  themselves. 

6.  Case.  — The  primitive  Indo-European  had  eight 
cases.  These  were  the  nominative,  the  subject  of  the 
sentence;  the  accusative,  the  case  of  the  direct  ob- 
ject ;  the  dative,  the  case  of  the  indirect  object ;  the 
genitive,  the  case  of  general  relation,  or  the  of  case ; 
the  instrumental,  the  case  denoting  accompaniment 
and  means,  the  with  or  by  case  ;  the  ablative,  the  case 
denoting  separation,  the  from  case ;  the  locative,  the 
case  denoting  the  place  where  any  thing  is  or  is  done, 
the  at  or  in  case ;  and  the  vocative,  or  the  case  of 
address.  All  of  these  were  originally  distinguished  by 
difference  of  ending.  But  the  tendency  showed  itself, 
from  the  earliest  period  of  which  we  have  any  record, 
to  give  up  one  or  more  of  these  case-forms,  and  either 
to  supply  the  place  left  vacant  by  another  case,  gov- 
erned by  a  preposition,  or  to  make  one  case  do  the 
duty  of  another  in  addition  to  its  own ;  thus,  in  Latin, 
the  ablative  was  required  to  perform  the  instrumental 
relation,  and,  in  Greek,  the  genitive  the  ablative  rela- 
tion. Of  these  eight  cases  the  primitive  Teutonic  still 
retained  six,  though  only  four  of  them  could  be  said  to 
exist  in  full  vigor.    The  two  that  were  entirely  lost  firora 


156  English  Language. 

this  branch  were  the  ablative  and  the  locative.  Two 
others,  the  vocative  and  the  instrumental,  maintained 
a  hngering  life.  A  special  form  for  the  vocative  is 
found  in  the  noun  of  the  Gothic.  The  instrumentai 
is  occasionally  but  clearly  seen  in  the  singular  of  the 
noun  and  adjective  in  the  Old  High  German  and  the 
Old  Saxon,  and  in  the  demonstrative  pronouns  of  all 
the  early  Teutonic  tongues,  save  the  Old  Norse.  It  is 
likewise  regarded  by  some  as  belonging  to  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  noun  and  adjective.  But  the  remaining  four 
cases  are  found  in  all  the  older  languages  of  this 
branch,  including,  of  course,  Anglo-Saxon,  and  still 
survive  in  one  of  them,  the  New  High  German. 

7.  Number. —The  primitive  Indo-European  had 
three  numbers,  —  the  singular,  the  dual,  and  the  plural. 
In  the  Teutonic  noun  and  adjective  the  dual  had  dis- 
appeared entirely;  but,  in  the  personal  pronouns  of 
the  first  and  second  person,  it  is  found  in  all  the  six 
earlier  languages  of  this  branch,  save  that,  in  some  of 
them,  forms  for  certain  cases  are  very  rare,  if  not  lack- 
ing entirely. 

8.  Declension.  —  There  are  two  declensions  of 
the  Teutonic  noun.  But  in  every  tongue  belonging  to 
this  branch  there  were  words  which  could  not  be  clas- 
sified under  either,  inasmuch  as  they  were  rehcs  of 
declensions  once  of  wide  employment  in  the  primitive 
speech,  but  gone  out  of  use  in  the  Teutonic.  These 
words  are  accordingly  so  few  in  number  as  to  be 
properly  treated  as  anomalous.  The  two  declensions 
actually  existing  are  commonly  called  the  vowel   ox 


Declension  in  the  Primitive  Teutonic.      157 

strong,  and  the  consonant  or  weak  declension ;  but  in 
the  older  languages  they  underwent  still  further  divis- 
ion. The  vowel-declension  was  split  up  into  three, 
according  as  one  of  the  short  vowels,  a  or  i  or  u,  was 
the  final  of  the  formative  syllable,  or  itself  the  forma- 
tive syllable,  added  to  the  radical  syllable  to  make  the 
stem ;  thus,  for  illustration,  the  Gothic  word  for  '■  fish ' 
was  in  the  nominative  fisks.  Of  this  the  radical  sylla- 
ble was  fisk,  to  vdiich  the  short  vowel  a  was  added  to 
form  the  'EXtmfiska  ;  and  to  this,  according  to  a  widely- 
received  hypothesis,  the  demonstrative  pronoun  sa 
was  appended,  making  an  original  theoretical  form  for 
the  nominative,  fiskasa,  which  was  cut  down  to  fisks, 
the  form  with  which  we  are  familiar.  In  Anglo-Saxon 
it  underwent  still  further  abbreviation,  nothing  but  the 
radical  syllable  fisc  being  left  in  the  nominati\'e  and 
accusative  singular. 

g.  In  each  one  of  these  subordinate  declensions  in 
a,  in  /,  and  in  u,  the  nouns  had  different  inflections, 
according  as  they  were  of  the  masculine,  the  feminine, 
or  the  neuter  gender ;  so  that,  in  the  primitive  Teu- 
tonic, there  were  probably  nine  different  inflections 
belonging  to  the  vowel-declension.  But  this  system 
nowhere  exists  in  its  theoretical  perfection,  there  being, 
for  example,  not  a  single  neuter  noun  belonging  to  the 
declension  in  /  in  any  one  of  the  earliest  Teutonic 
tongues;  and  there  are  numerous  other  indications 
that  this  system  was  losing  everywhere  its  complex 
character.  In  particular  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  the 
declension  in  a  had  practically  absorbed  the  declen- 


158  English  Language. 

sion  in  u,  the  special  terminations  of  the  latter  having 
been  abandoned,  and  those  of  the  former  having  been 
substituted.  There  was,  besides,  but  very  little  left  of 
the  declension  in  /,  its  words  having  largely  gone  over 
to  the  declension  in  a. 

10.  xA.gain  :  of  the  primitive  Indo-European  conso- 
nant declensions,  only  the  one  in  which  the  stem  ended 
in  an  was  retained  in  the  Teutonic ;  of  the  others, 
but  a  few  words  remained.  Accordingly  the  conso- 
nant declension  is  often  called  the  declension  in  n. 
This  became  a  favorite  declension  in  the  Teutonic 
tongues,  and  existed  in  full  vigor  in  all  the  early  ones. 
In  them  it  had  inflections  somewhat  distinct,  accord- 
ing as  the  noun  was  masculine,  feminine,  or  neuter, 
though  these  differences  were  by  no  means  so  marked 
as  in  the  vowel  declensions. 

11.  There  is  also  a  third  declension,  unlike  either 
of  the  two  just  mentioned,  which  is  found  in  pronouns 
and  adjectives  j  but  its  origin  and  characteristics  will 
be  given  further  on  (55).  Besides  these  general  fea- 
tures, common  to  the  inflection  of  the  Teutonic  noun, 
adjective,  and  pronoun,  there  were  certain  peculiari- 
ties connected  with  the  changes  in  vowels  or  conso- 
nants that  need  to  be  described  here,  for  they  have 
been  perpetuated  through  all  periods  of  English. 
They  are  not  confined,  however,  to  any  particular  parts 
of  speech. 

12.  One  of  these  is  called  rhotacism.  This  de- 
notes the  passing  of  the  letter  s  into  r,  —  a  transition 
which  was  by  no  means  uncommon  in  many  of  the 


Vowel-  Variation.  1 59 

Indo-European  tongues,  and  is  familiarly  exemplified 
in  the  Latin  comparative  of  the  adjective ;  as,  for  in- 
stance, fo7't-ior,  fort-ius.  Among  the  Teutonic  tongues 
it  was  most  widely  employed  in  the  Old  Norse ;  but 
in  Anglo-Saxon  it  was  occasionally  found,  especially  in 
the  inflection  of  certain  verbs.  Modem  Enghsh  still 
preserves  one  trace  of  it  in  the  imperfect  of  the  sub- 
stantive verb,  which  has  for  its  singular  was^  but  for  its 
plural  were  instead  of  wese. 

13.  Far  more  conspicuous  and  important  has  been 
and  is  the  part  played  by  vowel -variation.  This,  as 
used  in  this  work,  will  be  employed  to  denote  any 
change  of  vowel-sound,  no  matter  from  what  cause 
arising,  that  takes  place  within  the  radical  syllable.  It 
will,  therefore,  denote  ahke  the  changes  seen  in  inflec- 
tion in  such  words  as  juan,  men,  in  sell,  sold,  in  tJwive, 
throve,  and  in  the  formation  of  new  words  from  the 
same  root,  sometimes  closely  related  in  meaning,  some- 
times widely  differing,  as  may  be  exemplified  by  band 
and  bond,  grave  and  grove,  and  numerous  others. 
Two  kinds  of  vowel-variation  will  be  defined  more 
specifically. 

14.  The  first  is  vowel -change  (German  ablaut^. 
This  is  especially  seen  in  the  change  of  the  vowel  of 
the  radical  syllable,  by  which  the  inflection  of  one  class 
of  verbs  was  and  still  is  denoted.  Famihar  examples 
are  begin,  began;  thrive,  thi'ove ;  tear,  tore.  This  is  so 
marked  a  characteristic  of  all  the  Teutonic  tongues, 
including  the  English,  that  a  short  account  of  its  ori- 
gin is  desirable. 


i6o  English  Lajigtiage. 

15.  In  the  primitive  Indo-European  the  preterite 
was  originally  formed  by  simple  reduplication.  The 
verb  was  a  mere  root ;  and  the  idea  of  past  time  as 
distinguished  from  present  was  conveyed  by  the  simple 
process  of  doubling  the  root.  For  instance,  if  the 
radical  syllable  vid  meant  see,  saw  would  be  expressed 
by  vidvid.  Joining  these  together,  so  as  to  make  one 
word,  and  appending  the  personal  endings,  we  have 
the  primitive  preterite  tense.  But  in  all  the  languages 
of  our  family,  so  many  changes  early  occurred  by  the 
weakening  or  strengthening  of  vowels,  that  in  none  of 
them  is  the  original  simple  reduplication  preserved. 
In  the  primitive  Teutonic,  reduplication  was,  as  in  the 
other  Indo-European  tongues,  the  oldest  method  of 
forming  the  perfect ;  but  Gothic,  the  oldest  of  all,  has 
alone  plainly  preserved  it,  there  being  but  faint  traces 
of  it  left  in  the  other  languages  of  this  sub-family. 
The  Gothic  has  some  forty  verbs  in  which  reduplica- 
tion appears ;  but,  even  in  that  tongue,  it  had  so  far 
departed  from  the  theoretical  primitive  type,  that  only 
the  initial  letter  of  the  root  was  repeated  with  a  con- 
stant vowel-sound  denoted  by  ai  (thus,  present,  hlanda, 
*  blend, 'preterite,  baibland,  ^blended  ; '  present,  halda, 
'hold,'  preterite,  haihald,  'held  ; '  present,  slepa,  'sleep,' 
preterite,  saizlep,  '  slept ').  But,  in  the  other  Teutonic 
dialects,  the  abbreviation  had  been  carried  still  further. 
Not  only  was  the  final  letter  or  letters  of  the  redupli- 
cational  syllable  dropped,  but  the  initial  letter  of  the 
radical  syllable  and,  in  some  cases  the  vowel  also  of 
the  radical  syllable.     The  reduplicational  and  radical 


Vowel-Chance.  i6l 


•^ 


syllables  were  thus  united  into  one ;  and,  in  Anglo- 
Saxon  verbs  of  this  kind,  the  result  of  this  contraction 
was  a  monosyllabic  preterite  with  the  diphthong  ed 
running  through  both  the  singular  and  the  plural.  In 
some  verbs  there  was  a  still  further  contraction  to  e. 
Taking  the  three  verbs  above  given,  dlandan,  healdan^ 
and  slccpan,  we  have,  accordingly,  in  Anglo-Saxon,  the 
presents,  blande,  healde^  and  slcepe,  the  preterites, 
bleond,  heold,  and  slcp. 

1 6.  This  was  not  all.  In  many  verbs  an  incidental 
effect  of  the  reduplication  had  been  to  cause  a  change 
in  the  vowel  of  the  radical  syllable,  either  by  weaken- 
ing it  or  strengthening  it.  This  change  of  vowel, 
originally  a  mere  incident,  became,  in  the  course  of 
events,  systematized ;  and  a  natural  result  was,  that  it 
began  to  be  looked  upon  as  denoting  of  itself  the  pret- 
erite relation.  When  it  came  to  be  so  regarded  gen- 
erally, the  necessity  of  the  reduplicated  syllable  to  ex- 
press past  time  disappeared,  and  the  syllable  itself  was 
accordingly  dropped.  The  vowel-change  remaining 
constituted  a  method  of  conjugation  which  is  one  of 
the  most  striking  peculiarities  of  the  Teutonic  branch 
of  the  Indo-European  family.  It  is  only  these  verbs 
which  have  dropped  the  reduplicated  syllable  that  can 
be  strictly  said  to  have  undergone  vowel-change ;  but 
as,  even  in  the  verbs  in  which  the  reduplicational  and 
radical  syllables  have  been  united  into  one,  there  has 
been  a  variation  of  vowel,  resulting  from  contraction, 
the  latter  are  also  usually  included  in  this  class. 

17.  The  second  kind  of  vowel- variation  is  in  this 


1 62  English  Language. 

work  termed  vowel -modification  (German  um* 
lauf).  It  is  in  Modern  English  exemplified  in  the 
inflection  of  a  number  of  nouns,  such  as  man,  men ; 
foot,  feet ;  mouse,  mice.  It  is  not  only  widely  differ- 
ent in  its  character  from  vowel-change,  it  is  likewise 
widely  different  in  its  origin.  It  was  not  known  to  the 
Gothic;  it  is  comparatively  infrequent  in  Old  High 
German  ;  but  in  the  other  Teutonic  tongues  it  is  preva- 
lent, especially  in  the  Norse.  In  Anglo  Saxon  it  was 
principally  caused  by  the  influence  of  the  vowel  /  of 
a  following  syllable. 

1 8.  Vowel-modification  is  the  variation  of  sound 
produced  in  a  radical  syllable  by  the  influence  of  a 
vowel  in  the  syllable  added,  usually  an  added  inflec- 
tional syllable.  It  is  a  noticeable  fact,  that,  under  cer- 
tain circumstances,  the  vowel  of  an  added  syllable  has 
often  a  tendency  to  modify  the  vowel  of  the  syllable 
to  which  the  addition  is  made.  Before  pronouncing 
the  vowel  of  the  first  syllable,  the  thought  of  the  vowel 
of  the  following  one  comes  into  the  mind.  Uncon- 
sciously there  is  an  effort  to  bring  about  a  similarity 
of  sound ;  and  the  result  is,  that  a  sound  is  given  to 
the  vowel  of  the  first  syllable  intermediate  between  the 
sound  it  had  previously  and  the  so'-nd  of  the  vowel  in 
the  syllable  added.  This  is  seen,  for  illustration,  in  the 
infinitive  of  some  Anglo-Saxon  verbs,  in  which  the  a 
of  the  added  syllable  has  changed  the  /  of  the  radical 
syllable  into  e.  Thus,  to  the  root  hilp,  if  the  termina- 
tion -an  of  the  infinitive  be  added,  the  infinitive  itself 
becomes,  not  hilpan,  but  helpan,  our  'help.' 


Vowel-Modification.  163 

19.  But  it  was  the  influence  of  a  following  /  that 
was  most  conspicuous  in  Anglo-Saxon  in  modifying  the 
vowel  of  a  preceding  syllable ;  and  the  results  of  this 
influence  are  still  to  be  seen  in  Modern  English.  It 
is  not  necessary  to  point  out  all  the  variations  wrought 
by  this  vowel ;  only  those  which  have  been  perpetuated 
will  be  mentioned  here.  The  influence  of  the  /  of  a 
following  syllable  changed  a  of  the  preceding  to  e, 
ea  and  u  to  y,  0  to  <f,  and  il  to  y.  One  illustration 
will  suflice.  The  Anglo-Saxon  fat,  '  foot,'  has  in  the 
nominative  and  accusative  plural  /?/,  and  also  the  same 
form  in  the  dative  singular.  The  change  of  ^  to  ^  in 
these  cases  of  the  noun  is  due  to  the  influence  of  an  /, 
which  once  belonged  to  them  as  an  additional  syllable, 
but  which  had  come  to  be  dropped.  But,  though  the 
cause  disappeared,  the  efl'ect  continued.  Men  retained 
in  their  speech  the  modification  wrought  by  the  vowel 
after  the  fact  had  been  long  forgotten  that  the  vowel 
itself  had  ever  been  added. 

20.  This  concludes  all  that  is  necessary  to  be  said 
here  of  the  features  common  to  English  with  the  other 
Teutonic-  tongues.  Before  entering,  however,  upon  the 
later  specific  history  of  the  inflection. of  our  language, 
it  is  important  to  have  clearly  in  mind  the  terminology 
here  employed,  and,  though  already  given  in  fuH,  it  will 
bear  repetition.  The  history  of  the  language  is  in  this 
work  divided  into  four  periods :  the  first,  called  the 
Anglo-Saxon,  extending  from  the  coming  of  the  Teu- 
tonic tribes  to  the  year  1150;  the  second,  the  Early 
English,  extending  from  1150  to  1350;  the  third,  the 


164  English  Language. 

Middle  English,  from  1350  to  1550;  and  the  fourth, 
the  Modern  English,  from  1550  to  the  present  time.^ 
It  is  also  to  be  remembered,  that,  during  the  Early  and 
Middle  English  periods,  the  language  both  of  litera- 
ture and  of  daily  life  was  divided  into  three  great 
dialects,  called,  from  their  geogi-aphical  position,  the 
Northern,  the  Midland,  and  the  Southern ;  and  tha 
literary  English  is  a  descendant  of  the  Midland,  and 
the  Scotch  dialect  belongs  to  the  Northern.^ 

21.  There  is  still  another  point  which  needs  special 
consideration  before  entering  upon  the  internal  history 
of  our  tongue.  This  is  the  important  fact,  that,  from 
the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  century  to  the  middle  of 
the  fourteenth  century,  —  and  the  limits  might  be 
extended,  —  there  was  no  such  thing  as  standard 
English.  Every  thing,  in  consequence,  was  fluctuating 
and  uncertain.  No  authority  existed  anywhere,  as  to 
the  use  of  words  and  grammatical  forms,  to  which  all 
felt  themselves  obliged  to  submit.  Every  writer  was, 
to  a  large  extent,  a  law  unto  himself,  and  followed 
the  special  dialect  of  his  own  district  in  the  lack  of  a 
generally  recognized  standard  which  could  not  be 
safely  violated.  But  a  tongue  split  up  into  dialects, 
and  possessing  nowhere  binding  rules  for  syntactical 
agreement  and  arrangement,  nor  authoritative  meth- 
ods of  inflection,  can  hardly  be  said  to  have  a  history 
of  any  general  orderly  development  of  its  own.  The 
account  which  is  given  of  it  can  never  be  much  more 
than  a  classification  of  the  differences  of  speech  pre- 

^  Sec  pp.  70,  ff.  3  See  pp.  91,  ff. 


Periods  of  Comparison.  165 

vailing  in  different  sections  of  the  country,  or  a  record 
of  the  pecuharities  of  grammar  and  vocabulary  that 
characterize  individual  ^vriters.  This  is  especially  true 
of  our  speech  during  the  Early  English  period.  In  it, 
at  that  time,  can  be  found  the  processes  going  on  in 
full  activity  that  destroyed  the  language  of  literature 
as  seen  in  the  tenth  and  elevendi  centuries,  and,  like- 
wise, the  regenerating  processes  going  on  that  were  to 
develop  the  language  of  literature  of  the  fourteenth 
and  the  following  centuries.  It  is  only  between  these 
clearly  defined  points  that  comparison  can  properly 
be  made ;  and,  even  at  the  beginning  of  the  latter 
period,  the  language  of  literature  is  rather  in  process 
of  formation  than  actually  formed.  Still,  after  the 
break  up  of  the  classical  Anglo-Saxon,  the  fourteenth 
century  is  the  first  period  in  which  any  thing  can  be 
called  fixed,  and  in  which,  in  consequence,  any  com- 
parison can  be  made  between  the  past  and  what  is 
existing.  In  the  conflicting  usage  of  this  time  also,  the 
Midland  dialect  is  necessarily  selected,  to  the  exclusion 
of  the  other  two,  because  from  it  Modern  English 
strictly  descended ;  and  of  the  authors  who  \vrote  in 
the  Midland,  with  more  or  less  diversity  of  usage  among 
themselves,  the  language  of  Chaucer  is  likewise  neces- 
sarily selected  as  representative,  not  only  because  he 
was  much  the  greatest  of  all,  but  more  especially 
because  his  works  had  more  influence  on  the  future 
development  of  the  speech  than  the  works  of  all  the 
others  put  together.  The  two  points,  therefore,  select- 
ed in  representing  the  forms   prevalent  in  the  early 


1 66  English  Laiiguage. 

Jiistory  of  the  language  will  be  the  tenth  and  eleventh 
centuries,  —  the  period  of  the  later  classic  West-Saxon 
dialect  of  Anglo-Saxon,  —  and  the  latter  half  of  the 
fourteenth  century,  which  witnessed  the  birth  of  Mod- 
ern English  literature  in  the  strict  sense  of  that  phrase.   . 

22.  One  further  preliminary  statement  is  necessary. 
The  Anglo-Saxon  alphabet  consisted  of  twenty-four 
letters,  which,  with  three  exceptions,  were  borrowed 
from  the  Roman.  Of  these  three  one  was  merely  a 
crossed  d,  and  is  represented  by  the  forms  D  and  S  : 
the  other  two  were  Runes.  One  of  them  is  by 
German  editors  usually  represented  by  v,  by  English 
editors  by  w.  The  other  Runic  letter  was  p  \,  Both 
b  and  1>  are  represented  in  Modern  EngUsh  by  the 
combfnation  th,  which  has  two  distinct  sounds,  —  one 
seen  in  thoti^  then,  tithe ;  the  other,  in  thin,  three,  death. 
There  is  no  distinct  form  for  /  from  //  and  though  k, 
q,  and  z  occur  at  times  in  the  manuscripts,  they  did 
not  represent  sounds  then,  any  more  than  now,  which 
were  not  already  represented  by  other  letters,  or  by 
combinations  of  letters.  The  use  of  k  for  c  became 
much  more  common  after  the  Conquest.  By  the  fif— % 
teenth  century  the  employment  of  the  two  characters  ) 
representing  the  two  sounds  now  conveyed  by  th  was 
entirely  abandoned.  Another  character,  3,  was  in 
common  use  during  the  Early  English  period,  and 
represents  generally  the  Anglo-Saxon  g  at  the  begin-  .< 
ning  of  a  word ;  the  Anglo-Saxon  h  at  the  middle  or  , 
end  of  one  ;  as  Anglo-Saxon  gear,  Early  English  3^^^, 
Modem  English  year;  Anglo-Saxon  niht^  Early  Eng- 


Black-Letter.  167 

lish,  ni^ty  Modern  English  night  During  the  middle 
ages  the  letters  of  the  Roman  alphabet  were  changed 
into  a  variety  of  forms  by  the  ingenuity  of  the  monastic 
scribes  ;  and  the  peculiar  modification  of  this  alphabet 
used  in  England  is  called  black-letter.  During  the  ) 
fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries  books  were  printed^ 
almost  invariably  in  black-letter ;  but,  in  the  first  half 
of  the  seventeenth  century,  it  was  generally  given  up 
for  the  clearer,  original  Roman  characters  from  which 
it  had  been  taken. 


IV*- 


lXc.^ 


CHAPTER   II. 

THE  NOUN. 

23.  The  following  general  statements  may  be  made 
of  the  English  noun  during  the  Anglo-Saxon  period. 
It  had,  — 

1.  Two  declensions :  the  vowel,  or  strong,  and  the 
consonant,  or  weak.  The  former  was  limited  mainly 
to  stems  which  ended  originally  in  a  (8),  although 
there  were  remains  of  those  in  /  and  u,  especially 
the  one  in  /.  The  latter  was  likewise  mainly  limited 
to  the  stems  ending  van  (10),  fragments  only  of  those 
in  r  and  nd,  and  some  other  letters,  remaining. 

2.  Two  numbers  :  the  singular  and  tlie  plural. 

3.  Four  cases :  the  nominative,  the  genitive,  the 
dative,  and  the  accusative.  Many  grammarians,  fol- 
lowing Grimm,^  add  a  fifth,  the  instrumental,  which 
they  distinguish  from  the  dative  in  the  singular  by 
marking  for  the  former  the  final  <?,  common  to  both, 
as  long  L     There  is  no  difference  at  all  in  the  plural. 

4.  Three    genders :    the   mascuHne,   the   feminine, 

^  Geschichte  der  Deutschea  Sprache,  936.    Compare  sect.  5$. 
16S 


The  Noun. 


169 


and  the  neuter.     As  will  be  seen  by  the  examples,  it  is 
grammatical,  not  natural  gender. 

24.  The  following  paradigms  of  the  masculine  noun 
stdn^  *  stone,'  of  the  feminine  denu,  '  valley,'  and  the 
neuters  hors,  *  horse,'  and  scip,  'ship,'  will  exhibit 
the  various  inflections  of  the  noun  of  the  vowel- 
declension  as  commonly  seen  in  the  Anglo-Saxon 
They  all  belong  to  the  declension  in  a  ;  and  the  stems 
are  stdna,  dena,  horsa,  and  scipa  ;  but  this  vowel  has 
in  the  various  cases  often  been  dropped  altogether,  or 
been  weakened,  or  changed  into  other  vowels. 

I.  Vowel  Declension. 


Masculine. 


Nom.    stanas, 
Gen.      stana, 


Dat. 

Ace. 


stanum, 
stanas. 


SINGULAR. 
Feminine. 


Neuter. 


Nom. 

Stan, 

denu, 

hors, 

scip. 

Gen. 

stanes, 

dene, 

horses, 

scipes. 

Dat. 

stane, 

dene, 

horse, 

scipe. 

Ace. 

Stan. 

dene. 
PLURAL. 

hors. 

scip. 

Masculine. 

Feminine. 

Neuter. 

dena, 

(  dena, 

I  denena, 
denum, 
dena. 


hors, 
horsa, 


scipu. 
scipa. 


horsum,     scipum. 
hors.  scipu. 


25.  Nouns  originally  belonging  to  the  other  two 
vowel  declensions,  that  is,  those  whose  stems  ended 
in  /  or  2iy  had,  even  in  the  Anglo-Saxon,  gone  over 


I/O 


English  Language. 


wholly  or  partially  to  the  a  declension.  There  were 
no  small  number  of  feminines,  however,  which  be- 
longed still  to  the  /  declension ;  but  their  forms  had 
become  largely  confused  with  those  of  the  prevailing 
declension  in  a.  As  none  of  them  had  any  influence 
upon  the  later  development  of  the  inflection,  their 
consideration  is  omitted  here  altogether. 

26.  The  consonant,  or,  more  specifically,  the  con- 
sonant declension  in  n,  will  be  exemplified  by  para- 
digms of  the  mascuhne  noun  oxa,  'ox,'  of  the 
feminine,  tiinge,  'tongue,'  and  of  the  neuter,  edre, 
'  ear.'  The  stems  are  oxa7t,  tungan,  and  edran.  But 
not  only  have  the  original  case-endings  usually  dis- 
appeared ;  but,  in  some  instances,  the  n  also  has 
been  dropped,  or  the  a  weakened  into  e. 

II.  Consonant  Declension. 


SINGULAR. 

Masculine. 

Feminine. 

Neuter. 

Nom.    oxa, 

tunge, 

eSre. 

Gen.      oxan, 

tungan, 

earan. 

Dat.      oxan, 

tungan, 

earan. 

Ace,       oxan. 

tungan. 
PLURAL.      • 

edre. 

Masculine. 

Femiiilnv^. 

Neuter. 

Nom.     oxan, 

tungan, 

earan. 

Gen.      oxena, 

tungena, 

earena. 

Dat.       oxum, 

tungum, 

earum. 

Ace.       oxan. 

tungan. 

earan. 

27.  According  to  some  one  of  the  paradigms  found 


The  Noun.  171 

in  sects.  24  and  26,  the  immense  majority  of  all  nouns 
were  declined  during  the  Anglo-Saxon  period.  There 
are  a  few  exceptions,  which  will  be  referred  to  later. 
As  between  the  vowel  and  the  consonant  declensions, 
there  was  not  much  difference  in  the  number  of 
substantives  belonging  to  each  in  the  Anglo-Saxon; 
and  the  foreign  words  that  came  in  were  inflected 
according  to  either.  When  ending  in  a  consonant, 
these  were  usually  inflected  according  to  the  vowel 
declension,  and,  when  in  a  vowel,  according  to  the 
consonant.  This  state  of  things  did  not  perpetuate 
itself.  It  is  evident,  on  even  a  superficial  examination, 
that,  of  the  six  different  inflections  given  above.  Mod- 
ern English  has  retained  only  that  found  in  the  mas- 
culine noun  of  the  vowel  declension,  —  the  one  repre- 
sented by  Stan. 

28.  Still,  for  a  century  after  the  Norman  conquest, 
these  different  inflections  were  kept  up  with  a  fair 
degree  of  correctness.  The  changes  that  took  place, 
however,  such  as  they  were,  involved,  as  an  inevitable 
consequence,  the  confusion  of  the  declensions.  One 
of  these  was  the  general  weakening  into  e  of  the 
vowels  dr,  o,  and  u  of  the  endings.  This  manifested 
itself,  indeed,  long  before  the  Conquest ;  but  the  influ- 
ence of  the  literary  speech  was  sufficient  to  keep  it 
under  restraint.  As  soon  as  that  was  removed,  this 
general  weakening  of  the  vowels  made  rapid  headway. 
In  consequence  of  it,  stdnas,  for  illustration,  became 
staneSj  denu  and  dena  became  dene,  scipu  became 
scipe^  and  oxan^  tungan,  and   edran  became   oxeii. 


17^2  English  Language. 

tungen,  and  earen.  So  far  then,  as  difference  of  in* 
flection  was  denoted  by  difference  of  vowel  in  the 
endings,  all  distinction  between  number,  case,  and 
declension,  had  disappeared  before  the  end  of  the 
twelfth  century  by  the  general  use  of  e  for  the  vowels 
previously  employed. 

29.  This  was  not  enough  of  itself,  however,  to  over- 
throw the  inflectional  system  of  the  noun :  another 
change  came  in  to  break  down  the  broad  distinction 
previously  prevailing  between  the  vowel  and  the  con- 
sonant declensions.  After  the  middle  of  the  twelfth 
century,  there  was  a  constant  tendency  toward  their 
assimilation,  from  the  arbitrary  gains  and  losses  that 
went  on  in  the  use  of  a  single  letter.  This  was  n, 
which  was  of  special  importance  from  its  terminating 
a  large  number  of  cases  in  the  consonant  declension. 
From  these,  however,  it  came,  in  the  twelfth  century,  to 
be  frequently  dropped.  This  dropping  of  the  final  11 
had  likewise  manifested  itself,  as  early  as  the  ninth 
century,  in  the  West-Saxon  dialect,  though  then  more 
especiaUy  in  the  infinitive  and  subjunctive  of  the  verb, 
and  in  the  definite  adjective ;  but  here,  again,  as  in 
the  case  of  the  weakening  of  the  vowels  a,  o,  and  tc  to 
<f,  the  literary  language  had  arrested  the  movement. 
Within  a  century  after  the  Conquest,  however,  the 
process  had  again  begun.  Thus  the  genitive,  dative, 
and  accusative  singular  of  oxan,  tungan,  and  edran,  of 
the  consonant  declension,  after  passing  through  the 
intermediate  stages,  oxen,  tiingen,  and  earen,  became 
frequently,  with  the  n  dropped,  oxe^  tunge,  and  eare. 


The  Noun.  173 

This  brought  them  at  once  into  complete  similarity 
with  many  nouns  of  the  vowel  declension ;  but  here, 
again,  another  element  entered,  to  add  to  the  confu- 
sion. It  was  not  uncommon,  in  the  uncertainty  that 
sprang  up,  for  an  n  to  be  added  to  the  dative  and 
accusative  singular  of  nouns  belonging  to  the  vowel 
declension.  Thus  Anglo-Saxon  cyng,  'king,'  is  a 
masculine  noun  inflected  in  the  same  manner  as  stdn. 
Its  dative  and  accusative  singular  should  strictly  have 
been,  accordingly,  in  late  twelfth-century  English,  kinge 
and  king  respectively.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  they  both 
sometimes  appeared  as  kingen.  So  confused,  indeed, 
did  usage  become  in  the  proper  employment  of  these 
two  declensions,  especially  in  the  plural  number,  that 
it  is  by  no  means  infrequent  to  find  the  same  word,  in 
the  pages  of  the  same  author,  sometimes  with  the 
plural  es  of  the  masculine  nouns  of  the  vowel  declen- 
sion, or  with  the  plural  en  of  the  consonant.  In  the 
south  of  England  in  particular,  it  almost  seems  as  if 
the  two  terminations  could  be  used  indiscriminately ; 
and  double  endings  of  the  plural  were  certainly  com- 
mon there  till  the  Middle  English  period. 

30.  Nor,  indeed,  was  this  all.  A  third  plural  form 
came  into  use,  ending  in  e.  It  was  derived  from  the 
weakened  a  or  zi  of  the  feminine  and  neuter  nouns  of 
the  vowel  declension,  or  from  the  dropping  of  the  n 
of  the  consonant  declension.  The  same  author,  there- 
fore, formed,  at  times,  his  plural  with  three  different 
endings.  Thus  the  two  texts  of  the  "  Brut  "  of  Laya- 
mon  furnish,  as  plurals  for  the   Anglo-Saxon  mascu^ 


174  English  Language. 

line  noun  stdn^  the  forms  stanes,  staften,  and  stane, 
for  plurals  of  the  neuter  noun  hors,  the  forms  horses, 
horscn,  and  horse.  Such  a  system  as  this,  which  was 
little  more  than  the  product  of  ignorance  and  confu- 
sion, h^d  in  itself  no  element  of  perpetuity.  The 
process  of  simplifying  inflection  merely  as  a  measure 
of  rehef  went  on  rapidly,  in  consequence,  though 
much  more  so  in  the  North  than  in  the  South ;  and 
the  simplification  was  usually  attained  by  discarding 
inflection  entirely.  When,  in  the  -latter  half  of  the 
fourteenth  century,  a  new  language  of  literature  ap- 
peared, the  inflection  of  the  noun  had  been  reduced 
to  nearly  its  present  state ;  and  whatever  of  it  had 
been  preserved  conformed  to  that  of  the  Anglo-Saxon 
masculine  noun  of  the  vowel  declension,  represented 
in  the  paradigm  of  stdn.  As  this  inflection  became 
the  one  finally  established,  its  history  requires  a  more 
detailed  examination  of  the  cases  belonging  to  it  and 
of  the  gradual  adoption  of  the  endings  characteristic 
of  them  by  nouns  originally  inflected  differently. 

31.  As  regards  the  singular,  the  fact,  that,  in  this 
number,  masculines  and  neuters  of  the  vowel  declen- 
sion had  precisely  the  same  inflection,  —  as  can  be 
seen  by  comparing  stdn  and  hors,  —  had,  doubtless, 
much  to  do  with  the  universal  adoption  of  the  endings 
belonging  to  them ;  for  these  two  declensions  united 
embraced  a  very  large  proportion  of  the  nouns  of  the 
language.  In  these  the  nominative,  dative,  and  accu- 
sative came,  .in  the  time  of  Chaucer,  to  have  the  same 
form.     The   process   generally   took   place   after  this 


The  Noun, ,  /  175 

manner,  in  the  case  of  words  ending  in  a  consonant. 
The  dative  and  accusative  singular  early  began  to  lose, 
and  by  the  fourteenth  century  had  practically  lost,  all 
distinction  of  form  in  the  following  two  ways  :  either 
the  dative  sometimes  dropped  a  final  e  to  which  it  was 
entitled;  or,  secondly,  and  far  more  commonly,  the 
accusative  assumed  a  final  e  to  which  it  was  not  en- 
titled. Thus  the  dative  and  accusative  came  to  have 
the  same  form,  sometimes  ending,  sometimes  not  end- 
ing, in  a  final  e.  The  same  word,  indeed,  was  not 
only  treated  in  this  respect  differently  by  different 
authors,  but  differently  at  different  places  in  the  same 
manuscript.  Thus,  for  illustration,  the  dative  and 
accusative  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  scip  would,  in  Early 
English,  be  represented  in  both  cases,  sometimes  by 
ship,  and  sometimes  by  shipe. 

32.  But  the  assimilation  did  not  stop  at  this  point. 
In  Anglo-Saxon  the  form  for  the  nominative  and  ac- 
cusative was  alike  in  the  case  of  the  masculine  and 
neuter  nouns  of  the  vowel  declension,  and  it  was  natu- 
ral that  this  should  continue.  When,  therefore,  the 
accusative  assumed  an  e  which  did  not  belong  to  it, 
the  inevitable  result  was,  that  this  e  should  be  added 
likewise  to  the  nominative.  This  would  have  been 
pretty  certain  to  happen  if  no  other  influences  than 
those  ahead)-  mentioned  had  been  brought  to  bear;* 
but,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  very  powerful  ones  from  other 
quarters  aided  to  hasten  the  accomplishment  of  this 
result.  This  was  the  fact  that  the  nouns  belonging  to 
all  the  other  declensions,  which  had  begun  to  conform 


1/6  English  Language. 

to  tLe  inflection  of  the  masculine  noun,  had,  by  the 
weakening  of  the  final  vowel  and  the  dropping  of  the 
final  71,  brought  about  the  assimilation  of  the  nomina- 
tive, dative,  and  accusative.  An  examination  of  the 
changes  through  which  denu  and  oxa  went  will  make 
this  perfectly  clear.  Denu  had  in  Anglo-Saxon  its 
dative  and  accusative  dene:  the  weakening  of  the 
final  u  to  e  made  its  nominative  of  precisely  the  same 
form,  dene.  So  oxa,  which  in  Early  English  became 
oxe,  had  originally  for  dative  and  accusative  oxan, 
which  first  ,became  oxen,  and  then  oxe.  The  result 
was,  that,  by  the  beginning  of  the  Middle  English 
period,  the  nominative,  dative,  and  accusative  of  all 
nouns,  had  become  the  same  in  form.  Occasional 
instances  do  occur  of  a  regular  dative  form  distinct 
from  that  of  the  nominative  and  accusative ;  but  they 
were  merely  scattered  survivals  of  a  distinction  that 
was  generally  disregarded. 

33.  The  genitive  singular,  however,  of  the  mascu- 
line and  neuter  nouns,  remained  constant  to  the  ending 
es.  More  than  this,  the  termination  began,  from  the 
commencement  of  the  Early  English  period,  to  en- 
croach upon  the  genitives  of  the  other  declensions. 
These  were  e  of  the  feminine  nouns  belonging  to  the 
vowel  inflection,  and  an  of  all  the  nouns  of  the  con- 
sonant inflection,  which  an  also  early  became  e  by  the 
dropping  of  the  n,  and  the  weakening  of  the  a.  For 
a  long  time  genitives  in  e  from  these  two  sources  con- 
tinued to  be  used ;  and  they  are  still  found  as  late  as 
the  literature  of  the  latter  half  of  the  fourteenth  cen- 


The  Noun.  177 

tury.  But  even  then  they  were  far  from  common ;  and, 
in  the  following  century,  ^  as  a  genitive  ending  died 
out  entirely,  and  es  was  everywhere  employed  for  all 
nouns,  no  matter  what  their  origin. 

34.  In  the  plural  the  process  of  simplification  was 
even  more  thorough.  It  is  especially  to  be  noticed, 
that,  in  this  number,  the  one  termination  which  was 
common  to  all  nouns  of  whatever  declension  was  the 
very  first  to  give  way.  This  was  the  um  of  the  dative, 
which  has  left  an  occasional  relic  of  itself  in  Modern 
English  in  the  om  of  a  few  adverbs  derived  from 
nouns,  such  as  whilom.  It  might  naturally  be  ex- 
pected that  this  particular  ending,  from  the  very  uni- 
versality of  its  use,  would  be  the  last  to  be  given  up ; 
yet  its  early  abandonment  is  susceptible  of  an  easy 
explanation.  Even  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  monuments 
of  the  ninth  century  this  ending  ti7n  frequendy  ap- 
peared as  on ;  and  the  same  statement  is  true  of  the 
centuries  that  followed.  Within  the  hundred*  years 
after  the  Conquest,  this  on,  from  um,  not  only  was 
much  more  common  than  its  original,  but  its  vowel 
underwent  the  weakening  that  overtook  all  the  vowels 
of  the  endings,  and  the  termination  became  en.  This, 
in  the  case  of  nouns  of  the  consonant  declension, 
gave  it  the  same  forms  as  the  nominative  and  accusa- 
tive plural,  the  an  of  whose  terminations  had  been 
weakened  into  en  also.  In  the  confusion  that  soon 
sprang  up  in  the  use  of  the  two  leading  declensions 
by  the  dropping  or  appending  of  the  final  n,  all  dis- 
tinctive character  was  taken  away  from  this  ending  as 


178  English  Language. 

specially  belonging  to  the  dative  plural ;  and  it  adopted 
the  form  universally  that  was  found  in  the  nominative 
and  accusative,  whether  it  was  es  of  the  vowel  declen- 
sion or  the  en  of  the  consonant. 

35.  The  genitive  plural  held  out  longer  as  a  distinct 
termination.  At  least  one  form  of  it,  ene  or  en^  lasted 
down  to  the  end  of  the  fourteenth  century,  though  it 
cannot  be  called  at  any  time  common.  This  en{e)  is 
derived  from  the  regular  Anglo-Saxon  genitive  plural 
of  all  the  nouns  of  the  consonant  declension,  though  it 
was  sometimes  seen  in  the  feminine  nouns  of  the  vowel. 
But,  when  used  in  the  Early  English  period,  it  was  not 
limited  to  either  of  these  ;  thus,  in  the  phrase  Christe 
kingene  kynge}  '  Christ,  King  of  kings,'  the  word  king, 
which  is  etymologically  a  masculine  noun  of  the  An- 
glo-Saxon vowel  declension,  receives  this  termination. 
But  from  the  very  outset,  after  the  breaking  up  of 
the  inflections  of  the  original  tongue,  the  form  of  the 
genitive  plural  showed  a  teuvlency  to  assimilate  itself 
to  those'  of  the  nominative  and  accusative;  and,  by 
the  beginning  of  the  Middle  English  period,  this  had 
become  the  almost  universally  accepted  rule. 

36.  The  endings  of  those  two  cases,  the  nominative 
and  accusative  plural,  as  has  already  been  stated,  were 
usually  either  es,  from  the  as  of  the  masculine  vowel 
declension,  or  en,  from  the  aji  of  the  consonant  declen- 
sion. Had  these  been  kept  sharply  distinguished,  and 
confined  to  the  nouns  to  which  they  properly  belonged, 
they  would,  doubtless,  have  both  lasted  to  our  time  \ 

1  Langland's  Piers  Plowman.    Text  B,  passus  17,  105  (about  1377). 


The  Noun.  179 

but,  in  the  absence  of  any  standard  of  authority,  they 
were  confused  with  one  another,  and  often  apphed  at 
different  times  to  the  same  noun,  at  the  mere  fancy  of 
the  WTiter.  This  is  particularly  true  of  the  Southern 
dialect.  Language,  however,  is  too  economical  in  the 
use  of  its  material  to  permit  long  the  employment  of 
such  double  forms  on  any  extensive  scale.  One  of 
them  had  to  disappear,  and  in  our  tongue  it  was  the 
plural  in  en.  In  this  simplification  the  Northern  dia- 
lect, as  usual,  led  the  way;  and  one  of  the  great 
points  of  contrast  between  it  and  the  speech  of  the 
South  was  in  the  scarcity  of  the  forms  in  en,  in  the  one, 
as  compared  with  their  frequency  in  the  other.  In- 
deed, to  this  form  the  Southern  dialect  clung  with  so 
much  tenacity,  that  there  is  little  question  that  a  large 
number  of  nouns  with  this  ending  would  have  been 
now  in  constant  use,  if  that  dialect  had  been  the  parent 
of  Modem  English,  instead  of  the  Midland.  Not  only 
did  the  speech  of  the  South  give  to  the  same  noun  two 
plurals,  —  one  in  es,  and  the  other  in  en ;  but  it  was 
as  apt  to  give  the  termination  en  to  Anglo-Saxon  nouns 
of  the  vowel  declension  as  to  those  of  the  consonant. 
37.  The  Midland  dialect,  as  usual,  followed  a  path 
between  the  two  extremes,  but  in  this  respect  was 
influenced  much  more  by  the  example  of  the  North  in 
discarding  the  termination  in  en.  By  the  latter  half 
of  the  fourteenth  century,  the  ending  es  had  become 
established  as   the  regular  form.^      In   Chaucer,  the 

*  There  were  orthographic  variations  of  this,  due  to  difierence  of  pronun- 
ciation, such  as  is,  ys,  us  ;  but  they  do  not  need  to  be  considered  here. 


l8o  English  Language. 

representative  author  of  the  hterary  speech,  we  find 
the  plural  regularly  terminating  in  s ;  and  the  only 
relics  of  the  original  plurals  in  an  to  be  found  in  his 
writings  are  asschen,  '  ashes  ; '  assen,  '  asses  ; '  been, 
*  bees  ; '  eye^i,  '  eyes ; '  ^ee7i,  '  fleas ; '  flo7t,  '  arrows  ; ' 
hosen,  *  hose  ; '  oxen  ;  and  fon,  '  toes  ; '  and  of  these 
the  modern  plurals  in  s  are  also  to  be  found  employed 
by  him  in  the  case  of  ashes,  bees,  and  toes.  To  this 
list  may  be  added  schoon,  'shoes,'  which  in  Anglo- 
Saxon,  however,  belonged  generally  to  the  masculine 
vowel  declension,  though  it  had  occasionally  plural 
forms  of  the  consonant.  This  use  of  s  as  the  regular 
termination  of  the  plural,  then  firmly  established,  was 
never  after  subjected  to  change.  It  ought  to  be  added, 
that  the  third  plural  in  e,  already  described  fs^)?  had 
died  out  entirely ;  at  least,  in  the  confused  use  of  final 
e,  which  had  now  become  current,  it  was  no  longer 
recognizable  as  distinct  from  the  neuter  forms  which 
are  now  to  be  described. 

38.  In  examining  the  paradigms  of  the  neuter 
monosyllabic  nouns  of  the  vowel  declension  (24)  one 
fact  becomes  apparent :  this  is,  that  such  of  these  nouns 
as  had  the  radical  vowel  long  by  nature,  or  by  position 
before  two  consonants,  did  not  assume  //  in  the  nomi- 
native and  accusative  plural.  Accordingly,  these  cases 
had  the  same  form  as  the  corresponding  cases  of  the 
singular,  as  can  be  easily  seen  in  the  inflection  of 
hors.  Most  of  these  nouns  came  gradually,  during 
the  Early  English  period,  to  conform  to  the  declension 
of  the  masculine  nouns,  and  assumed  the  termination 


The  Noun.  i8l 

es  in  the  plural.  Occasionally  some  of  them  assumed 
e,  the  weakened  form  of  the  //  final  of  the  plural  of 
neuter  nouns  of  the  same  declension,  whose  vowel  was 
short ;  but  this  was  not  often  the  case.  In  Chaucer's 
time  the  vast  majority  had  accepted  the  plural  in  i", 
though  some,  such  as  tJwig,  and  hors,  zn^folk,  andyear, 
were  still  in  a  state  of  transition,  exhibiting  double  forms 
for  the  plural,  —  one  ending  in  s,  the  other  precisely 
resembling  tne  singular.  Others,  again,  held  on  to 
the  ancient  inflection,  and  apparendy  suffered  no 
change ;  for,  as  the  nominative  singular  was  apt,  in 
such  instances,  to  have  assumed  a  final  e,  it  is,  of 
course,  impossible  to  say  whether  e,  when  it  occurs  in 
the  plural,  is  to  be  considered,  in  any  particular 
instance,  as  a  plural  termination,  or  a  mere  inorganic 
addition  to  the  word. 

39.  Comparing,  therefore,  the  literary  language  at 
the  beginning  of  the  Middle  English  period  with  that 
prevalent  during  the  Anglo-Saxon  period,  it  will  be 
observed,  that,  in  the  centuries  which  intervened,  the 
four  cases  of  the  noun,  which  in  the  singular  had  to  a 
greater  or  less  extent  been  distinguished  by  differences 
of  form,  had  now  been  reduced  to  two.  Again  :  in 
the  Anglo-Saxon  plural,  the  nominative  and  accusative 
had  never  had  any  distinction  of  form  ;  but  there  had 
been  special  forms  for  the  genitive  and  dative.  These 
had  now  all  been  reduced  to  one,  and  that  one  was, 
with  a  very  few  exceptions,  the  form  ending  in  s. 
Accordingly,  the  paradigm  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  j-/a«, 


1 82  English  Language. 

which  had  now  become  the  general  representative  of 
the  noun  inflection,  was  the  following  :  — 

Singular.  Plural. 

Nom.,  Dat.,  and  Ace.     ston  or  stone,  All  Cases,    stones. 

Genitive,     stones. 

It  is  evident  at  a  glance  that  this  is  practically  the 
Modern  English  declension.  The  few  slight  changes 
that  have  since  occurred  are  nothing,  as  will  be  seen, 
but  a  natural  development  of  the  tendency  that  had 
already  brought  the  inflection  of  the  noun  to  this 
point.  The  later  history  of  the  inflection  wiU  clearly 
ohow  that  the  main  differences  between  our  declension- 
to-day  and  that  of  the  fourteenth  century  are  all  due 
to  a  more  hurried  pronunciation,  and  that  other  dif- 
ferences are  apparent  and  not  real,  inasmuch  as  they 
are  differences  in  the  representation  of  the  sounds,  and 
not  in  the  sounds  themselves. 

40.  At  the  beginning  of  the  Middle  English  period, 
nouns  wliich  had  originally  ended  in  a  vowel  almost 
invariably  ended  in  e ;  and  this  e,  we  have  seen,  was 
frequently  assumed  by  nouns  which  originally  ended 
in  a  consonant,  and  were,  therefore,  not  strictly  entitled 
to  it.  But,  between  the  fourteenth  and  sixteenth  cen- 
turies, this  final  e,  whether  etymologically  belonging  to 
the  word  or  not,  disappeared  from  pronunciation.  In 
the  lawless  and  capricious  spelling  of  the  language 
that  sprang  up  after  the  invention  of  printing,  the 
retention  of  this  final  e  in  the  orthography  came  to  be 
a  mere  matter  of  accident.     The  words  given  in  the 


The  Noun.  183 

Anglo-Saxon  paradigms  are  sufficient  to  serve  aa 
examples.  Of  the  modern  representatives  of  these,. 
stone  and  horse  now  terminate  in  an  e,  to  which  they 
are  not  strictly  entitled;  tongue  has  retained,  while 
den  and  ear  have  dropped,  the  e  to  which  they  are 
entitled ;  and  ox  or  axe  in  modern  orthography  some- 
times receives  it,  and  sometimes  not.  Again  :  ship, 
which  in  Early  English  frequently  appeared  as  shipe, 
sehipe,  has  gone  back,  as  regards  the  ending,  to  its 
original  form. 

41.  As  the  dative  and  accusative  have  come  to  be 
precisely  alike  in  form  in  both  nouns  and  pronouns, 
the  name  of  "  objective  "  is  generally  given  by  modem 
grammarians  to  the  case  expressing  the  relations  of 
direct  and  indirect  object,  formerly  expressed  by  the 
two.  The  indirect  relation  is,  to  be  sure,  usually 
indicated  by  a  preposition  with  the  noun ;  but  it  is 
not  so  invariably.  In  such  a  sentence  as,  '  He  gave 
the  boy  a  book,'  boy  denotes  the  original  dative  of  tlie 
indirect,  and  dook  the  original  accusative  of  the  direct 
object. 

42.  In  the  former  half  of  the  Middle  English  period 
the  es  of  the  genitive  singular  and  of  the  plural  com- 
monly appeared  as  a  distinct  syllable,  as  in  sto7ies  in 
the  example  given  above.  This  was  sometimes  not 
the  case,  however;  and  s  itself  is  often  found  added 
in  Chaucer,  instead  of  es,  to  polysyllabic  words,  those, 
in  particular,  that  ended  in  a  hquid,  as,  for  illustration, 
naciouns.  But,  by  the  beginning  of  the  Modern  Eng- 
lish period,  the  final  es  had  ceased  to  be  pronounced 


184  English  Language, 

as  a  separate  syllable,  save  in  those  cases  where  the 
nature  of  the  word  still  requires  it  to  be  sounded,  as  in 
foxes,  horses.  The  dropping  of  the  unpronounced  e 
was  a  result  that  usually  followed.  In  the  seventeenth 
century  the  practice  of  distinguishing  the  genitive 
singular  from  the  plural  came  into  vogue  by  placing 
an  apostrophe  before  the  final  s  of  the  former ;  but  it 
was  not  till  the  eighteenth  century  that  this  became 
fully  established.  The  still  further  distinction  was  then 
made  of  placing  an  apostrophe  after  the  s  of  the  geni- 
tive plural ;  so  that,  for  example,  the  genitive  singular 
bofs,  and  the  genitive  plural  l?oys\  though  spelled 
and  pronounced  alike,  are  in  reading  easily  recognized 
as  different.  The  genitive  case  has  likewise  come 
to  be  so  limited  in  usage  as  to  express  ordinarily  the 
relation  of  possession,  and,  in  consequence,  most 
grammarians  give  it  the  title  of  ''possessive."  This  is, 
however,  an  unfortunate  name ;  for,  while  this  is  the 
relation  it  expresses  principally,  it  is  by  no  means  the 
one  it  expresses  exclusively. 

The  plural  form  of  nearly  all  nouns  had  come, 
in  the  fourteenth  century,  to  be  precisely  the  same  as 
that  of  the  genitive  singular ;  and  the  later  history  of 
the  one  differs  in  no  respect  whatever  from  the  later 
history  of  the  other.  When  the  e  of  the  genitive  end- 
ing was  dropped,  it  was  dropped  in  the  endings  of  the 
plural :  when  it  was  retained  in  the  former,  it  was  also 
retained  in  the  latter.  The  account  just  given  of  the 
one,  therefore,  involves  that  of  the  other. 

43.  This   completes   the   history  of  what  may  be 


The  Noun.  185 

called  the  regular  inflection  of  the  noun.  It  now  re- 
mains to  consider  the  comparatively  few  words,  which, 
in  spite  of  the  pressure  always  at  work  to  produce  uni- 
formity, have  steadily  resisted  the  tendency  to  go  over 
to  the  declension  which  in  the  fourteenth  century  had 
become  the  sta:ndard  one.  These  belong  to  four 
classes ;  and  in  all  of  them  it  is  the  method  alone  of 
forming  the  plural  that  distinguishes  their  inflection 
from  the  rest. 

■^  44.  The  first  of  these  embraces  the  neuter  mono- 
syllabic nouns  already  spoken  of  (38)  as  exhibiting 
no  difference  of  form  between  the  nominative  and 
accusative  singular  and  plural.  While  most  of  these 
had  gone  over  to  the  ordinary  inflection  in  s,  a  few 
held  out,  and  to  this  day  have  remained  faithful  to  the 
original  inflection.  These  are  deer  (A.  S.  dear),  sheep 
(x\.  S.  scedp),  swine  (A.  S.  swin)  ;  and  to  these  may, 
perhaps,  be  added  neat  {A.  S.  neat),  though  this  is 
usually  a  collective  noun.  Thing,  during  the  Middle 
English  period,  conformed  to  the  regular  declension,  as 
did  several  others,  though  they  often  showed  a  disposi- 
tion to  exhibit  double  forms  for  the  plural,  —  one  with, 
and  one  without,  s.  But  the  tendency  has  always  been 
toward  the  exclusive  adoption  of  the  regular  inflection 
by  these  words.  Yet,  even  in  the  Early  English  period, 
there  had  come  into  the  language  a  number  of  words 
from  Romance  sources,  which  followed  in  their  declen- 
sion the  native  words  that  underwent  no  change  in  the 
plural ;  and,  though  most  of  these  have  now  become 
regular,  there  are  still  several,  both  from  foreign- and 


l86  English  Lajiguage, 

from  native  sources,  that  continue  to  show  two  forms 
for  the  plural.  They  usually  denote  number,  measure, 
weight,  or  length  of  time ;  and  with  some  of  them, 
such  as  brace,  and  sail  in  the  sense  of  'vessel,'  as  'fifty 
sail,'  the  regular  form  in  s  is  unusual.  In  general, 
however,  it  may  be  said  that  the  modern  language 
shows  an  increasing  preference  for  the  plural  in  s. 
But  there  continue  to  be  many  words,  such  as  pair 
and  pairs,  score  and  scores,  couple  and  couples,  in 
which  the  frequency  of  the  form  either  with  or  without 
s  varies  with  individual  usage. 

45.  The  second  class  includes  a  few  nouns,  which, 
in  the  English  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  period,  invariably 
underwent  vowel-modification  (17)  in  the  nominative 
and  accusative  plural,  and  have  in  some  cases  trans- 
mitted these  modified  forms  to  the  English  of  our  day. 
This  was  originally  due,  as  has  been  explained,  to  the 
influence  of  a  following  vowel ;  and,  while  the  vowel 
once  following  has  been  dropped,  the  vowel-modifica- 
tion wrought  by  it  remains.  In  the  instances  about 
to  be  cited,  it  was  an  i  that  has  disappeared,  which 
brought  about  the  variation  of  6  to  e,  of  1I  to  y,  of  u 
to  y,  and  of  a  to  e.  In  the  Anglo-Saxon  their  varia- 
tions were  limited  to  the  words  of  the  following  list,  in 
which  the  nominative  singular  and  plural  are  placed 
side  by  side  :  — 


Singular. 

Plural. 

Singular. 

Plural. 

boc. 

book, 

bee. 

gos,     goose. 

ges. 

broc, 

breeches, 

brec. 

t65,      tooth. 

te6. 

fot, 

foot, 

fa. 

c^,       cow, 

c^ 

The  Noun.  187 

Singular  Plural.  Smgular.  Plural. 

lus,       louse^         lys.  burh,    borougk^    byrh. 

mus,     mouse^       mys.  turf,      turf,  tyrf. 

man,    man,         men. 

That  this  modification  of  the  vowel  was  not  in  itself 
a  sign  of  the  plural  is  at  once  made  clear  by  the  fact, 
that,  in  Anglo-Saxon,  the  dative  singular  had  in  these 
words  precisely  the  same  form  as  the  nominative 
plural. 

^  46.  Of  these  nouns,  book,  borough,  and  turf  had 
gone  over,  by  the  end  of  the  fourteenth  century,  to  the 
legular  inflection  of  the  plural  in  s.  In  the  Modern 
English  breeches,  however,  the  original  vowel  6  of  the 
singular  has  been  abandoned ;  and  along  with  the  ex- 
clusive use  of  the  word  in  the  plural,  with  its  regular 
plural  sign,  the  modified  vowel  e  of  the  original  plural 
has  been  retained.  Accordingly,  it  is  from  brec,  and 
not  from  broc,  that  the  present  word  has  been  directly 
derived.  The  transition  took  place  during  the  Early 
English  period.  The  etymological  plural  of  cii  was 
retained  in  the  speech  of  the  North,  and  is  still  found 
in  the  kye  of  the  Scotch  dialect.  But  another  plural 
form,  kine,  had  come  in  before  the  end  of  the  four- 
teenth century,  and  became  established  in  the  lan- 
guage of  literature.  Its  origin  will  be  discussed  in 
the  remarks  upon  the  third  class  (48).  This,  in  turn, 
though  it  has  never  died  out,  was  obliged,  during  the 
Modern  English  period,  to  give  way  in  common  use  to 
the  regular  form  cows.  The  remaining  s\x,foot,  goose, 
tooth,  louse,  mouse,   and    man,    have   remained   un- 


1 88  English  Language. 

changed,  in  respect  to  vowel-modification,  during  all 
the  periods  in  the  history  of  the  language,  though 
sporadic  instances  occur,  in  which  the  regular  ending 
s  appears,  particularly  in  the  case  of  foot,  which  has 
shown  at  times,  especially  in  the  Early  English  period,  a 
l)lural  in  s,  with  the  vowel  unmodified. 

47.  In  the  third  class  are  embraced  the  few  nouns 
which  still  exhibit  the  ending  in  n,  once  common  to 
half  the  substantives  of  the  language.  It  has  already 
been  stated,  that,  in  the  long  conflict  between  the 
vowel  and  the  consonant  declensions,  the  former  had 
triumphed;  and  of  the  ten  words  belonging  to  the 
latter,  that  are  used  b}^  Chaucer  (37),  three  are  like- 
wise to  be  found  with  plurals  in  x,  clearly  showing  that 
the  transition  to  the  regular  form  was  going  on.  It 
continued  to  go  on  with  unabated  vigor  after  his  death  ; 
and,  by  the  beginning  of  the  Modern  English  period, 
the  only  genuine  historical  plural  in  n  that  was  univer- 
sally used  in  prose  and  poetry  v/as  oxen,  for,  while 
eyen  and  shoon  continued  to  be  employed,  they  were 
looked  upon,  then  as  now,  merely  as  poetic  forms. 
Of  the  vast  number  of  nouns  originally  belonging  to 
the  consonant  declension,  ox  is  the  soHtary  survival  in 
Modern  English,  and  even  that,  in  the  singular  number, 
conforms  to  the  vowel  ^leclension.  Tt  is  to  be  added 
that  hosetij  which  Chaucer  used,  dropped  its  n,  but  did 
not  add  an  s. 

48.  At  the  same  time,  during  this  long  conflict,  the 
consonant  declension  did  not  fail  to  add  some  woids 
to  its  numbers.    In  fact,  in  the  Southern  dialects,  many 


The  Notin. 


189 


nouns,  as  we  have  seen,  belonging  to  the  vowel  de- 
clension, formed  their  plural  in  11.  Still  the  literary 
language  in  the  latter  half  of  the  fourteenth  century 
almost  entirely  discarded  this  termination  ;  though,  as 
might  be  expected,  there  is  a  slight  difference  of  usage 
in  the  wTitings  of  difterent  authors.  Taking  Chaucer 
as  the  representative  of  this  period,  the  following  state- 
ment can  be  made  in  regard  to  these  forms.  There 
are  six  words,  as  employed  by  him,  which  still  continue 
to  show  in  the  plural  a  final  n  derived  from  the 
plural  of  the  consonant  declension.  Three  of  them  — 
l)rother,  sister,  and  daughter — belong  strictly  to  nei- 
ther of  the  two  leading  Anglo-Saxon  declensions,  but 
to  a  group  called  r-stems,  of  which  there  were  a  few 
survivals  in  the  Teutonic  tongues.  The  other  three, 
it  will  be  noticed,  exhibit  irregularities.  The  Anglo- 
Saxon  form,  the  Early  English  intermediate  forms,  and 
the  Middle  English  form  of  the  plural,  are  here  given 
side  by  side  ;  though  there  are  numerous  orthographic 
variations  of  the  two  latter,  which  will  not  be  noticed 
here. 


Lnglo-Saxon. 

Early  English. 

Middle  English. 

broSru, 

brothre,  ) 
brethre,  ) 

bretheren. 

dohtra, 

dohtere, 

doughtren. 

sweostni, 

sustre, 

sustren. 

cildru, 

childre, 

children. 

fa,  hostile. 

fo, 

fon. 

cy, 

kye. 

kyn. 

190  English  Language. 

Of  these  words,  childre7i  is  the  only  one  that  has 
clung  to  the  plural  in  «  exclusively.  Xine,  while  still 
retained,  has  given  way,  in  common  use,  to  the  regular 
form,  cows ;  and  in  the  sixteenth  century  brothers 
was  developed  alongside  of  brethren,  and  in  the  seven- 
teenth century  became  the  form  generally  employed. 
The  language  still  retains  the  two  plurals,  but  makes  a 
slight  distinction,  ordinarily,  in  their  meaning.  The  e 
of  brethren  is  perhaps  an  intrusion  from  the  dative 
singular,  in  which  the  vowel  d  was  modified  into  e,  just 
as  fot  became,  in  that  case,  fct.  The  other  words, 
daugJiter,  sister,  and  likewise  foe,  which  was  originally 
an  adjective,  gave  up  the  n  before  the  beginning  of 
the  ]\Iodern  English  period,  and  assumed  s  in  its 
place. 

49.  There  now  remains  the  fourth  class  to  be  con- 
sidered,—  that  of  the  foreign  nouns  that  have  been 
imperfectly  Anglicized,  and  still  retain,  in  consequence, 
the  plural  they  had  in  the  tongue  from  which  they 
were  taken.  Naturally  the  endings  are  very  diverse. 
Most  of  these  words  have  been  introduced  during  the 
I^Iodern  English  period ;  many  of  them  are  terms 
connected  with  the  natural  or  physical  sciences.  A 
large  number  of  them  are  therefore  technical  in  their 
character ;  and  of  all  of  them,  it  is  true,  that,  at  first, 
they  are  only  employed  by  the  educated.  So  long  as 
their  use  was  limited  to  this  class,  they  underwent  no 
change.  The  original  plural,  no  matter  what  might  be 
its  ending,  was  rigidly  retained.  But  no  sooner  did 
they  cease  to  be  purely  technical  than  they  were  at 


The  Noun.  191 

once  affected  by  the  tendency  of  the  language  to  strive 
after  uniformity.  With  many  of  them,  in  consequence, 
the  English  plural  in  s  either  superseded  the  foreign 
plural  altogether,  or  became  estabhshed  alongside  of 
it.  As  ill  jstration  of  the  former,  omens  has  driven  out 
the  original  plural  07?iina,  once  in  use,  and  dogmas  has 
almost  entirely  taken  the  place  of  dogmata  ;  while,  on 
the  other  hand,  formulae  and  formulas  may  be  said 
to  be  equally  common,  though,  in  technical  works,  the 
former  is  perhaps  preferred.  There  is,  indeed,  httle 
question  that  all  these  words  that  come  to  be  gen- 
erally employed  v.-ould  go  over  to  the  regular  form, 
and  be  fully  Anglicized,  were  it  not  for  the  influence 
of  the  literary  language,  which  in  many  cases  makes 
the  foreign  plural  perfecdy  familiar  to  all.  The  plural 
genera,  from  genus,  for  example,  is  so  firmly  established, 
that  genuses,  from  present  appearances,  can  have  no 
hope  of  ever  being  adopted.  The  same  statement  is 
also  true  of  the  Latin  nouns  in  is  whose  plural  ends  in 
es,  such  as  ellipsis,  ellipses,  hypothesis,  hypotheses, 
oasis,  oases,  and  others ;  though  here  the  perpetuation 
of  the  original  form  has  been  materially  aided  by  the 
difficulty  of  pronouncing  what  would  be  the  Anglicized 
form. 

50.  It  is  natural,  however,  that,  in  many  of  these 
pouns,  double  forms  should  be  produced,  and  indeed 
continue  to  inc  -ease  as  the  words  pass  more  and  more 
from  technical  i,  \to  common  usage.  The  uneducated, 
or  rather  those  not  specially  educated,  cannot  be 
expected  to  know  the  foreign  plurals  \  and  the  substi- 


192  English  Language. 

tution  of  the  English  plural  sign  s  gets  rid,  by  an  easy 
process,  of  all  doubts  and  difficulties.  Consequently 
we  have  apparatus  and  apparatuses,  radii  and  radi- 
uses, phenomena  and  phenomeitons,  voj'tices  and  vor- 
texes, virtuosi  and  virtuosos,  and  numerous  other 
double  forms.  In  some  cases  there  is  a  difference  of 
meaning  between  these  two  plurals,  as,  for  instance, 
between  genii  and  geniuses,  indices  and  indexes.  In 
this  respect  the  word  stamen  reverses  the  usual  order 
of  things ;  for  while,  in  science,  the  Anglicized  plural 
stamens  is  the  form  employed,  it  is  the  foreign  plural 
stamina  that  is  heard  in  the  language  of  common  life. 
But  this  is  doubtless  due  to  the  fact  that  men  have 
largely  forgotten  that  the  latter  form  has  any  singular 
connected  with  it. 

51.  For  it  is  clear  that  the  use  of  foreign  plurals  is 
certain,  in  some  cases,  to  result  in  confusion.  The 
great  majority  of  men  who  speak  English  cannot  be 
expected  to  be  familiar  with  any  speech  but  their  own ; 
and  when  endings  are  introduced  of  whose  force  they 
are  ignorant,  it  is  impossible  that  they  should  in  every 
instance  use  them  with  exact  propriety.  Such  termina- 
tions are  in  the  nature  of  exceptions  to  a  general  rule, 
and  the  exceptions  are  but  few  which  men  will  take  the 
trouble  to  learn.  It  is  too  much  to  ask  of  those  whose 
acquaintance  with  language  is  limited  only  to  their  own, 
or  even  to  the  modem  tongues,  to  feel  that  stami7ia 
and  effluvia  'and  errata  are  real  plurals :  the  fact,  if 
known  to  them  at  all,  must  be  learned  in  each  particu- 
lar case.    Under  such  circumstances,  mistakes  in  usage 


The  Noun.  193 

are  almost  sure  to  arise.  Perhaps  no  more  striking 
illustration  of  this  can  be  found  than  in  the  history  of 
the  two  words  cherub  and  seraph.  Their  respective 
plurals  in  the  Hebrew,  from  which  they  were  borrowed, 
were  cherubim  and  seraphitn ;  and  these  forms  natu- 
rally were  the  ones  first  used  for  that  number.  But 
the  language  also  developed  the  regular  English  form, 
cherubs  and  seraphs,  giving  the  words,  as  in  several 
other  instances,  two  plurals.  At  this  point,  confusion 
came  in.  Cherubiin  and  seraphim  were  not  felt  to  be 
plurals,  and  the  result  was,  that  they  were  treated  as 
singulars ;  and,  being  looked  upon  as  singulars,  they 
themselves,  though  really  plurals,  received  the  English 
plural  sign  s  in  addition.  Consequently  che7'ubi7ns 
and  seraphims  came  into  wide  use ;  and  this  corrup- 
tion was  thoroughly  established  in  the  language  before 
the  Middle  English  period.  How  firmly  fixed  it  had 
become  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  these  are  the 
forms  generally,  if  not  invariably,  employed  by  the 
translators  of  the  English  Bible,  though  they  were,  of 
course,  acquainted  with  the  Hebrew. 

52.  Of  these  four  classes  of  nouns,  the  plural  of 
which  varies  from  the  reg,ular  plural,  this  only  remains 
to  be  said  :  whenever  the  genitive  is  employed,  they 
assume  an  s,  after  the  manner  of  the  ordinary  inflec- 
tion. This,  in  a  few  instances,  renders  the  genitive 
plural  different  from  the  nominative  plural.  In  the 
case  of  the  nouns  which  undergo  vowel-modification, 
that  variation  causes  necessarily  the  genitive  plural  to 
differ  in  form  from  the  genitive  singular.     These  com- 


194  English  Language. 

plete  all  the  exceptions  to  the  regular  inflection  that 
Modern  English  presents  outside  of  purely  euphonic 
ones,  such  as  the  dropping  of  the  sound  of  s,  and 
sometimes  of  its  sign,  in  the  genitive  of  words  which 
themselves  terminate  in  the  sound  of  s,  as  may  be 
illustrated  by  such  phrases  as  "  for  conscience'  sake," 
and  the  like. 


CHAPTER   III. 

THE  ADJECTIVE. 

53.  The  English  noun,  in  the  course  of  its  history, 
has  been  largely  stripped  of  its  inflections ;  but  its 
losses  bear  little  proportion  to  those  of  the  adjective. 
To  a  certain  extent,  the  same  influences  operated  upon 
both.  Together  they  underwent  the  changes  that  were 
brought  about  by  the  weakening  of  the  vowels  a,  o, 
and  u  to  e,  and  the  dropping  of  the  final  7i ;  and  the 
results  which  followed  in  the  one  case  took  place  like- 
wise in  the  other,  and  do  not  need  to  be  repeated. 
But  the  losses  of  the  adjective  at  even  an  early  period 
were  far  more  extensive  than  those  of  the  noun,  as  the 
confusion  of  the  declensions  was  also  much  greater. 
With  the  former  part  of  speech,  inflection  has  now 
entirely  disappeared.  One  unchanged  form  has  taken 
the  place  of  the  manifold  ones  originally  used  to 
express,  not  merely  the  distinction  of  gender,  number, 
and  case,  but  also  of  declension. 

54.  During  the  .\nglo-Saxon   period  the  adjective 

>95 


196  English  Language. 

was  distinguished  by  the  possession  of  the  following 
characteristics :  — 

1.  Two  declensions. 

2.  Forms  differing,  to  a  great  extent,  for  the  three 
genders,  —  the  masculine,  the  feminine,  and  the 
neuter. 

3.  Two  numbers,  the  singular  and  the  plural,  with 
marked  differences  of  forms  for  each. 

4.  Four  cases, — the  nominative,  genitiye,  dative, 
and  accusative.  To  these  most  grammarians  add  a 
fifth,  the  instrumental,  which,  in  the  paradigms  found 
below,  is  put  down  as  a  secondary  form  of  the  dative, 
corresponding  to  the  dative  of  the  masculine  and 
neuter  nouns  of  the  vowel  declension  of  the  noun. 
Those  who  regard  these  forms  as  belonging  to  the 
instrumental  make  the  final  e  long  e,  as  in  the  simi- 
lar case  of  the  noun  (23). 

Rich  as  the  adjective  evidently  was  in  inflection 
during  the  Anglo-Saxon  period,  it  is  evident  that  even 
then  it  had  suffered  losses.  The  vowels  a^  i,  and  u^ 
may  all  have  been  added  to  the  stem  of  the  adjective 
as  to  that  of  the  noun  (8)  in  the  primitive  Teutonic ; 
but  even  in  the  earliest  of  the  Teutonic  languages, 
the  Gothic,  the  stems  in  /  had  disappeared,  if  they 
ever  existed.  Stems  in  u  were  still  to  be  found  in 
that  tongue;  but  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  they  had  given 
way  entirely  to  stems  in  a,  which  had  become  univer- 
sal. 

55.  The  Teutonic  adjective  differs  from  the  adjec- 
tive of  most  of  the  other  languages  belonging  to  the 


The  Adjective.  197 

Indo-European  family  in  two  respects.  The  first  is, 
that  every  adjective  is  decHned  in  two  different  ways ; 
and  the  second  is,  that  one  of  these  declensions  is 
distinct  from  that  of  the  noun.  This  latter  declension 
is,  according  to  a  view  widely  adopted,  based  upon 
the  addition  to  the  adjective  stem  of  a  demon- 
strative pronoun  which  has  fully  united  with  it.  This 
pronoun  does  not  exist  in  any  of  the  Teutonic  tongues, 
save  as  it  is  thought  to  be  detected  in  the  terminations 
of  the  adjective,  but  is  deemed  to  be  the  Sanskrit 
relative  yas,  yd,  yad,  which,  in  the  primitive  Teutonic, 
had  assumed  the  force  of  a  demonstrative,  and  been 
appended  to  the  adjective  (with  whose  form  it  finally 
melted),  instead  of  standing  before  it.  One  name  of 
the  declension  in  which  this  is  seen  is,  therefore,  the 
"pronominal." 

56.  The  other  declension  is  also  called  sometimes 
the  "  nominal "  or  noun  declension,  because  its  forms 
correspond  with  those  found  in  the  corresponding 
masculine,  feminine,  and  neuter  nouns  of  the  conso- 
nant declension  in  n  of  the  noun.  Besides  these,  the 
terms  "  strong  "  and  "weak"  are  apphed  to  the  two 
inflections ;  but  there  are,  in  addition,  other  names, 
derived  from  the  use  of  the  adjective,  which  will  be 
the  ones  employed  here.  The  adjective  was  usually 
declined  according  to  the  consonant  or  weak  declen- 
sion, when  the  substantive  which  it  qualified  was  made 
definite,  by  connecting  with  the  quahfying  adjective 
the  definite  article,  or  a  demonstrative  or  possessive 
pronoun;   but,  when  the  adjective  was   simply  used 


198 


English  Language. 


alone,  the  substantive  was,  as  a  consequence,  indefinite  \ 
and  the  adjective  was  inflected,  in  such  cases,  according 
to  the  pronominal  or  strong  declension.  Hence  have 
arisen  the  terms  "  definite  "  and  "  indefinite  "  as  applied 
to  the  inflection  of  the  adjective.  This  peculiar,  and  it 
must  be  said  useless,  characteristic  of  the  primitive 
Teutonic,  has  wholly  disappeared  in  English,  but  still 
survives  in  Modern  German.  The  following  para- 
digms of  the  adjective  blind,  '  blind,'  inflected  both 
ways,  will  show  the  forms  of  the  language  as  they  are 
generally  found  in  the  writings  of  the  tenth  and 
eleventh  centuries.  But  during  the  Anglo-Saxon  peri- 
od itself  there  was  a  good  deal  of  sloughing  off  of  the 
terminations  of  the  adjective  in  the  indefinite  declen- 
sion, thereby  reducing  them  to  the  same  form.  Thus 
the  nominative  and  accusative  plural  would  be  ordina- 
rily in  the  language  of  the  eighth  century,  Mnde,  blinda, 
blindu,  for  the  mascuhne,  feminine,  and  neuter  respec- 
tively, instead  of  the  one  form  here  given,  blinde  ;  and 
survivals  of  the  earlier  usage  constantly  make  their 
appearance  in  the  later  Anglo-Saxon. 

57.  Indefinite  (Pronominal  or  Strong)  De- 
clension. 


SINGULAR 

PLURAL. 

Masculine. 

Feminine. 

Neuter. 

All  Genders. 

Nom, 

,    blind, 

blind, 

blind, 

blinde, 

Gen. 

blindes, 

blindre. 

blindes, 

blindra, 

Dat. 

j  blindum, 
\  blinde, 

} 

blindre. 

(  blindum, 
\  blinde, 

\ 

blindum, 

Ace. 

blindne. 

blinde. 

blind. 

blinde. 

The  Adjective. 


199 


58.  Definite    (Nominal   or  Weak)    Declen- 


sion. 


SINGULAR. 

PLURAL. 

Masculine. 

Feminine. 

Neuter. 

All  Genders. 

Norn. 

blinda, 

blinde, 

blinde, 

blindan. 

Gen. 

blindan, 

blindan, 

blindan. 

blindena 

Dai. 

blindan, 

blindan, 

blindan, 

blindum 

Ace. 

blindan. 

blindan. 

blinde. 

blindan. 

59.  As  an  illustration  of  the  use  of  these  declensions, 
*  a  blind  man  '  would  be,  in  Anglo-Saxon,  Mind  man  ; 
*of  a  blind  man'  would  be  blindes  manjtes;  whereas, 
making  the  substantive  definite  by  connecting  it  with 
the  demonstrative  pronoun,  '  that  blind  man  '  would 
be  se  blinda  man  ;  and  '  of  that  blind  man '  would  be 
^ces  blindan  mannes. 

60.  A  glance  at  these  paradigms  is  sufficient  to  show 
how  rich  in  inflection  the  English  adjective  was  in  the 
Anglo-Saxon  of  the  tenth  and  eleventh  centuries, 
though  even  then  it  had  lost  many  of  the  endings 
which  two  centuries  before  had  belonged  to  it.  Dowti 
to  the  twelfth  century  this  fulness  of  inflection  was 
retained;  but  the  same  confusion  that  overtook  the 
noun  during  the  centuries  following  the  Conquest 
befell  the  adjective  also,  ffhe  two  declensions  of  the 
adjective,  are  still  retained  to  this  day,  as  has  been 
said,  in  Modern  High  German.  In  English  this  varia- 
tion of  inflection  was  one  of  the  first  things  to  go.y 
By  the  end  of  the  second  century  after  the  Conquest 
the  distinction  between  the  definite  and  the  indefinite 
adjective  had  not  only  everywhere  broken  down,  in 


200  English  Language. 

some  places  it  had  disappeared  entirely ;  but  the  con- 
fusion that  sprang  up  in  consequence  did  not  result 
in  giving  exclusive  ascendency  to  any  one  particular 
inflection,  as  in  the  case  of  the  noun  :  it  had  rather 
the  effect  of  causing  the  terminations  to  be  abandoned 
altogether.  In  a  general  way,  it  may  be  said,  that,  in  the 
fourteenth  century,  the  plural  of  monosyllabic  adjectives 
ended  in  e,  and  was  distinguished  from  the  singular  by 
that  termination,  and  that  this  was  the  most  that  then 
remained  of  the  once  extensive  inflection  of  this  part 
of  speech.  So,  for  illustration,  blind  would  be  used  for 
all  cases  of  the  singular,  blmde,  for  all  cases  of  the 
plural.  But  necessarily  this  distinction  could  not  apply 
to  adjectives  which  ended  in  e :  it  had  even  then  ceased 
to  apply  to  adjectives  of  more  than  one  syllable.  It 
was,  moreover,  further  weakened  by  the  fact  that  many 
adjectives  which  originally  ended  in  a  consonant  had, 
like  the  noun,  assumed  a  final  e  to  which  they  were 
not  entitled ;  and,  in  consequence,  the  ending  of  the 
singular  was  the  same  as  that  of  the  plural.  By  the 
end  of  the  Middle  EngHsh  period  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  two  numbers  was  utterly  swept  away,  and 
the  unchanged  radical  form  of  the  adjective  was,  as 
now,  the  only  one  employed.  Remains  of  the  defi- 
nite declension  also  existed  in  the  fourteenth  century, 
especially  in  the  assumption  of  the  final  e  by  adjec- 
tives preceded  by  the  definite  article  and  demonstra- 
tive pronoun.  Thus,  '  the  blind  man '  would  be 
generally  written  and  pronounced  the  bliiide  man. 
But  before   the  beginning  of   the   Modern    English 


The  Adjective.  201 

period  all  traces  of  adjective  inflection  of  any  kind 
whatever  had  disappeared  completely.  A  relic  of  the 
definite  declension,  perhaps  the  only  one,  is  still  seen 
in  the  form  olden  (A.  S.,  ealdaii)  in  phrases  such  as 
'  the  olden  time ; '  but  in  such  an  expression  olden 
is,  to  modern  feeling,  simply  a  correlative  form  of  the 
adjective  old,  and  not  an  oblique  case  of  it,  as  ori- 
ginally it  was. 

6i.  The  hiscOry  of  the  participle  declension  does 
not  differ  from  that  of  the  adjective.  It  also  was 
inflected  both  ways  in  Anglo-Saxon,  and  shared  through- 
out in  all  the  losses  suffered  by  the  latter. 

Comparison. 

62.  Comparison,  being  really  a  matter  of  derivation, 
and  not  of  inflection,  does  not  strictly  find  a  place  in 
a  history  of  the  latter.  It  is  convenient,  however,  to 
follow  the  usual  method,  and  so  treat  it. 

In  all  of  the  Indo-European  tongues  certain  suffixes 
were  added  to  the  radical  of  the  adjective  to  form 
the  comparative :  to  form  the  superlative,  a  sec- 
ondary suffix  was  added,  usually  to  the  suffix  of  the 
comparative.  These  suffixes  underwent  much  change 
of  form  in  the  various  languages ;  but  their  general 
resemblance  and  common  descent  are  apparent  in  all. 

The  suffixes  almost  universally  employed  in  the 
Teutonic  to  form  the  comparative  were  is  and  os :  to 
these  another  suffix,  ta,  was  added  to  form  the  super- 
lative. But  in  every  one  of  the  Teutonic  tongues, 
save  the  Gothic,  the  s  of  the  comparative  had  suffered 


202  English  Language. 

rhotacism  (12),  as  it  did  usually  in  Latin  (cf.  alt-us^ 
alt-tor,  alt-ius)  \  and  the  forms  employed  were,  in  con- 
sequence, ir  and  dr.  In  the  superlative,  however,  the 
change  of  i-  to  r  did  not  take  place  ;  and  the  original 
forms  of  the  suffixes  were  therefore  ista  and  osta. 

63.  In  Anglo-Saxon,  moreover,  the  /  or  6  of  the 
suffix  was  dropped  in  the  comparative.  In  many 
words,  however,  the  vowel-modification  produced  by 
the  i  (19)  continued  to  remain,  and,  in  some  in- 
stances, transmitted  the  modified  form  to  a  later 
period.  Thus  lang,  'long,'  Strang,  'strong,'  under 
the  influence  of  the  vowel  which  had  come  to  be 
dropped,  became  lengra  (for  lengird)  and  strengra 
(for  stre7igira.)  In  a  similar  manner,  eald  or  aid, 
'old,'  became  in  the  comparative  either yldr a  01  eldra. 
But,  as  the  vowels  i  and  6  of  the  suffixes  were 
dropped,  the  simple  letter  r  was  consequently  all  that 
was  added  to  form  the  comparative ;  and,  as  adjec- 
tives in  this  degree  were  invariably  inflected  according 
to  the  definite  declension,  the  termination  of  the 
nominative  was  therefore  always  ra  and  ;r.  In  the 
superlative,  the  final  a  of  both  suffixes  was  dropped, 
and  the  /  of  the  ending  ist  was  usually  weakened  into  e. 
The  comparison  of  the  adjective  in  the  Anglo-Saxon 
period  may,  in  consequence,  be  fully  seen  in  the  fol- 
lowing examples  :  — 

blind,  blind,  blind-r-a,  blind-ost. 

brad,  broad,  brad-r-a,  brad-ost. 

Strang,  strong,  streng-r-a,  streng-est. 

eald,  old,  yld-r-a,  yld-est. 


The  Adjective,  203 

64.  In  the  Early  English  period  the  /  and  the  d, 
which  had  been  dropped  in  the  Anglo-Saxon,  were 
resumed  in  the  comparative  ;  but  there  sprang  up  con- 
fusion in  the  use  of  the  two  vowels,  and  the  /,  it  is  to 
be  added,  was  invariably  weakened  into  e.  The  same 
adjective  would  appear  in  the  comparative  and  super- 
lative degree,  sometimes  with  the  suffixes  ore,  osf, 
sometimes  with  ere,  est.  A  representative  comparison 
of  the  adjective  during  this  transition  period  would  be 
the  following :  — 

(  blijid-ere,  blind-est  {e). 

'  ( blind-ore,  blind-ost  {e). 

The  forms  with  the  vowel  e  became  steadily  pre- 
dominant, and  by  the  fourteenth  century  were  almost 
invariably  employed.  The  final  e  of  the  comparative 
was  also  at  that  time  frequently  dropped  in  spelKng, 
as  it  had  been  in  pronunciation ;  and  by  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Modern  English  period  it  had  disappeared 
altogether,  leaving  the  comparison  precisely  in  the  sit- 
uation in  which  it  is  at  present. 

65.  The  modification  of  the  vowel  seen  in  Strang, 
*  strong,'  strengra,  'stronger,'  lang,  'long,'  lengra, 
'  longer,'  and  other  words,  lasted  down  to  the  four- 
teenth century,  and  later ;  but  in  the  Middle  English 
period  it  disappeared  from  the  language  entirely,  with 
the  single  exception  of  old,  which  still  clings  to  elder 
and  eldest,  the  representatives  of  the  original  compari- 
son, although  it  has  developed,  and  commonly  uses,  the 
more  strictly  regular  forms,  older  and  oldest. 

66.  In  the  "Ancren  Riwle,"  a  work  written  about 


204  English  Language. 

1 2  20,  the  first  recorded  instance  of  a  comparison  by 
means  of  adverbs  is  found  in  the  phrase  the  mcste 
dredful.  This  comparison  by  means  of  the  adverbs 
more  and  most  is  rare  in  the  thirteenth  century ;  but 
in  the  fourteenth  it  made  rapid  progress.  Since  that 
time  it  has  steadily  increased  in  use,  flourishing  side 
by  side  with  the  suffixes  in  er  and  est.  In  the  case  of 
polysyllabic  adjectives  this  method  of  comparison  is 
now  much  the  more  common  one,  few  late  Englihh 
writers  employing  forms  like  Bacon's  honorablest^ 
Shakspeare's  sovereignest,  or  Milton's  virtuousest,  ex- 
guisitest,  excellentest.  But  the  tendency  to  give  up 
the  employment  of  such  formations  is  not  due  to  their 
being  improper,  but  to  their  being  difficult  to  pro- 
nounce. 

67.  The  existence  of  two  methods  of  comparison 
enabled  English  to  gratify  that  disposition  to  make 
use  of  double  comparison  to  which  all  the  Teutonic 
tongues  have  manifested  an  inclination.  This  was 
introduced  in  the  fourteenth  century,  and  for  the  next 
three  centuries  was  largely  employed.  In  the  latter 
part  of  the  sixteenth  century,  and  the  beginning  of 
the  seventeenth,  when  it  was  by  many  regarded  as  an 
elegancy  of  style,  it  was  perhaps  the  most  prevalent. 
Expressions  like  Hhe  ??iost  nnkindcst  cut  of  all' 
("Julius  CiEsar,"  act  iii.  scene  2),  'the  most  straitesi 
sect  of  our  religion'  (Acts  xxvi.  5),  'my  most  dearest 
nephew'  (Sir  Thomas  More's  "Edward  V."),  are  to 
be  found  scattered  through  the  pages  of  numerous 
writers  of  the  Elizabethan  age,  and  earlier.     By  Ben 


Jonson  this  is  spoken  of  as  "  a  cortaiX  kind  of  Fn!2,lish 
Atticism,  or  eloquent  ]>hrase  of  speech,  imitating  the 
manner  oi'  the  most  ancientest  and  llnest  ("irecians, 
who,  for  more  emphasis  and  vettemenc^y's  sake,  used 
so  to  speak."  Tins  usage  died  out  in  tlie  seventeenth 
centurv,  but  lias  been  occasit)nally  employcti  by  laig- 
hsii  poets  of  tlie  present  time.  Tlie  assertion,  how- 
ever, so  frequently  made,  that  adjectives  expressing 
the  highest  possible  degree  of  a  quality,  like  <•///>/", 
su/>;r///(',  AvA'<7,  are  not  subject  to  comparison, 
whether  logically  correct  or  not.  is  not  merely  utterly 
at  \ariance  with  the  usage  of  the  best  writers  ot  all 
l)eriods  of  iMiglish,  but  with  that  of  the  best  writers 
o(  both  ancient  and  modern  cultivated  tongues. 

68.  The  English  irregular  comparison  seen  in  .<'<''''''> 
/;</</,  /////<■//.  antl  /////r,  goes  back  to  the  earliest  tin\es, 
and  inileeil  is  connnon  to  all  the  Teutonii'  languages. 
The  irregularity  consists  in  the  fact  that  the  conipara- 
ti\e  and  superlative  are  derixed  iVom  a  stem  different 
from  that  of  the  pt)sili\e.  I\lorco\er.  in  rt-'.v.sv  (A.  S. 
7*Mv  y./)  and  /r.o-  (A.  S.  /us-su)  the  change  oi  .v  to  /•  (02) 
did  uoi  take  place.  J.rssrr  is  a  double  comparative, 
as  is  also  aufrsrr,  —  a  form  connnon  in  the  I'.li/a- 
bethan  ])erioil,  but  now  rarely  emploNcd.  There  has 
freciuiMitlv  been  a  disposition  shown  to  comjiare  these 
adji-ctivcs  regularly.  O'-'.^/vand  i^iU^Jrs/,  baiMer  tmA 
Ihuiilcst,  are  occasionally  \o  be  met  with  in  our  litera- 
ture, though  they  cannot  be  called  common  ;  anil  liith'r 
and  littu'st  arc  forms  freiiuenlly  found  in  the  I'nglish 
dialects,  anil  sometimes  make  their  ai)i)earance  in  the 
literary  speech. 


2o6  English  Language. 

69.  There  are  relics  of  still  other  suffixes  of  compari- 
son to  be  found  in  Modern  English ;  as,  for  instance, 
that  of  ma,  seen  in  such  words  as  foreinost  and 
utmost.  In  Anglo-Saxon,  for-ma  meant  'foremost/ 
and  itte-ma  meant  '  utmost ; '  but  even  then  the  super- 
lative force  of  the  suffix  ma  began  to  be  felt  as  weak, 
and  est  was  added,  thereby  forming  the  strengthened 
double  superlatives  fyrmest  and  tUmest.  This  double 
superlative  suffix  mest  appears  in  Modern  English  as 
most  in  several  words  besides  these ;  such  as,  mid- 
most, southmost,  the  0  having  been  substituted  for  e 
as  a  consequence  of  mest  being  confo-unded  with  the 
adverb  inost,  used  to  express  the  superlative. 


CHAPTER  I\^ 

THE   PRONOUN. 

70.  The  pronoun  is  usually  divided  into  four  classes, 
—  the  personal,  the  demonstrative,  the  interrogative, 
and  the  relative ;  to  these  is  added  frequently  a  fifth 
class,  called  the  indefinite,  comprehending  a  number 
of  words  which  occupy  a  position  half  way  between 
the  noun  and  adjective,  and  sometimes  partake  of  the 
nature  of  both.  As  they  received  the  inflection  of 
one  of  these  two  parts  of  speech,  their  later  history  is 
involved  in  that  of  the  noun  and  adjective,  and  does 
not  demand  attention  here.  It  is  different  with  the 
words  belonging  to  the  four  other  classes.  These 
have  a  history  of  a  somewhat  exceptional  character. 
Ordinarily  the  discussion  of  the  pronoun  begins  with 
the  personal ;  but  as,  in  the  later  development  of  the 
English  language,  some  of  the  forms  of  the  demonstra- 
tive have  gone  over  to  the  personal,  it  is  expedient  in 
this  case  to  begin  with  the  former. 


207 


2o8  English  Language. 

The  Demonstrative  Pronouns. 

71.  The  only  two  genuine  demonstratives  in  Mod* 
ern  English  are  that  and  this  with  their  respective 
plurals.  But  in  the  earliest  period  of  the  language 
they  had  a  fulness  of  inflection  of  which  there  has 
been  but  little  survival  in  the  present  tongue.  Each 
of  them  will  require  separate  consideration. 

72.  The  following  is  the  inflection  in  Anglo-Saxon 
of  the  demonstrative  represented  in  Modern  English 
by  that:  — 


SINGULAR. 

PLURAL. 

Masc. 

Fein. 

Neut. 

All  Genders. 

Nom. 

se, 

seo, 

pset, 

pa. 

Gen. 

])^S, 

fs^re, 

paes, 

para.  | 
paera.  ] 

Vat. 

):am, 

faere, 

pam, 

pam. 
psbm. 

Ace. 

];one. 

pa. 

pset, 

J-a. 

Inst. 

\i,  re. 

Besides  varying  forms  of  the  other  cases  not  given 
here,  the  nominative  masculine  and  feminine  singular 
sometimes  presented  the  forms  \e  and  \ed  for  se  and 
seo  ;  and  the  former  were  apparendy  the  older  of  the 
two.  The  transition  of  the  nominative  singular  femi- 
nine, and  of  the  whole  plural,  into  the  pronoun  of  the 
third  person,  will  be  discussed  farther  on  (82). 

73.  In  the  twelfth  century,  the  inflection  began  to 
fall  away ;  but,  as  usual,  there  was,  in  this  respect,  the 


The  Pronoun.      ^  209 

widest  difference  between  various  sections  of  the 
country.  By  the  beginning  of  the  Middle  EngHsh 
period,  the  forms  were  reduced  to  that  for  the  singu- 
lar, which,  as  is  evident,  was  derived  from  the  neuter 
nominative  and  accusative.  The  plural  was  repre- 
sented by  tho,  the  Anglo-Saxon  \d.  All  the  other 
forms  had  either  disappeared,  or  been  put  to  other 
uses.  Nor  was  tho  itself  for  the  plural  common.  In 
Middle  English  the  plural  sign  s  was  added  to  this 
form,  making  it  thos,  or,  as  it  came  usually  to  be 
spelled,  those ;  and  this  has  since  remained  the  regu- 
lar plural.  By  many,  however,  those  is  derived  from 
the  plural  of  the  pronoun  \es  (76).  The  Northern 
dialect  of  the  thirteenth  century  shows  a  plural  thas, 
meaning  ^  those ; '  but  in  this,  as  in  so  many  other 
cases,  tliat  dialect  probably  preceded  the  Midland  in 
adding  an  s  to  the  original  form. 

74.  The  instrumental  \.e  or  ]>/',  however,  continued 
to  remain  in  use  with  the  comparative  of  the  adjec- 
tive, and  in  the  form  the  it  is  still  constantly  em- 
ployed in  Modern  English,  as  it  in  fact  has  been  dur- 
ing every  period  in  the  history  of  the  tongue.  In 
such  phrases  as  "  the  more,  the  better,"  fJie  is  often 
falsely  explained  as  an  article ;  whereas  it,  in  fact,  is 
nothing  more  than  a  rehc  of  the  lost  instrumental  case 
of  the  demonstrative  pronoun. 

75.  But  the  definite  article  does  owe  its  origin  to 
this  demonstrative.  In  the  Anglo-Saxon  period  this 
use  of  it  is  frequently  exemplified,  though  many  cases 
occur  when  it  is  hard  to  decide  whether  the  word  is 


2IO  English  Language. 

really  the  article  or  the  pronoun.  In  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury the  form  se  died  out,  and  the  correlative  form,  \e, 
took  its  place ;  and,  from  that  time  on,  the  and  thai 
became  the  general  representatives  of  the  article, 
being,  in  fact,  used  indifferently  with  nouns  of  any 
gender.  As  such  they  both  remained  down  to  the 
fifteenth  century ;  though,  in  the  Early  English  of  the 
South,  forms  derived  from  the  other  cases  were  occa- 
sionally to  be  found.  Especially  is  this  true  of  \en  or 
then^  from  the  accusative  \one,  as  may  be  seen  by  the 
following  example  :  — • 

Then  wey  he  nom  to  Londone,  he  and  alle  his.^ 
The  and  that,  however,  were  the  usual  articles  for 
several  centuries.  But  the  use  of  the  latter  as  a  de- 
monstrative, as  a  relative,  and  also  as  a  conjunction, 
had  insensibly  the  tendency  to  cause  the  to  be  preferred 
as  the  article,  not  only  for  the  sake  of  greater  definite- 
ness,  but  to  reheve  the  other  word  from  being  too  much 
over-worked.  So,  during  the  Middle  English,  thai 
ceased  to  be  used  any  longer  as  an  article.  Certain 
phrases  in  which  it  had  once  been  so  employed  con- 
tinued, however,  to  survive  long  after  any  such  general 
employment  of  it  had  been  abandoned.  This  is  true, 
especially  of  the  phrases  that  oon,  and  that  other,- 
meaning  'the  one,'  and  'the  other.'  In  these  the 
final  /  of  the  that  was  often  transferred  to  the  following 
word,  giving  us  the  tone  and  the  tothe7',  —  expressions 
which  are  not  uncommon  in  Elizabethan  English,  and, 

^  He  took  the  way  to  London,  he  and  all  his  (Robert  of  Gloucester,  vol.  \, 
p.  364). 


The  Pronoun.  2it 

indeed,  are  occasionally  met  with  now.  In  fact,  the 
word  tother  is  often  used  alone,  and,  when  so  used, 
is  generally  written  with  an  apostrophe,  f  other,  as  if 
the  /  were  a  contraction  of  the,  instead  of  being  in  its 
origin  the  final  letter  of  that. 

76.  The  following  is  the  paradigm  of  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  demonstrative  pronoun  whose  representative  in 
modern  English  is  this  :  — 


SINGULAR, 

PLURAL. 

Masc. 

Fem. 

Neut. 

All  Genders. 

Nam. 

))es, 

feos, 

l>is, 

]'as. 

Gen, 

fises, 

fisse, 

jnses, 

|)issa. 

Dat, 

fisum, 

jnsse, 

Jnsum, 

|)isum. 

Ace, 

fisne. 

fas. 

pis. 

J^as. 

Inst, 

peos,  ) 

l>ys.  i 

77.  Even  less  of  this  word  has  survived  than  of  the 
foregoing.  It  is  the  neuter  nominative  and  accusative 
that  has  alone  remained  of  the  singular ;  and  the  drop- 
ping of  the  other  forms  not  only  took  place  early,  but 
had  been  completed  by  the  close  of  the  thirteenth 
century,  though  sporadic  examples  of  some  of  them 
can  be  found  later.  In  the  fourteenth  century,  only 
the  form  this  is  found  in  the  singular :  the  plural  is 
represented  by  this,  thise,  or  these,  derived  from  the 
singular  form.  It  was  the  last  that  gradually  sup- 
planted the  two  others,  and  became  in  Middle  English 
the  regular  plural,  which  it  has  ever  since  remained. 
The  form  this,  however,  continued  to  survive,  and,  as 


212  English  Language. 

a  plural,  is  not  uncommon  in  Elizabethan  English ;  as, 
for  illustration,  "Meaning  to  aid  thee  in  ////i- Turkish 
arms  "  (Marlowe's  Tamburlaine,  part  ii.  act  i.  sc.  3. 
8vo  of  1592)  ;  "What  needs  this  long  suggestions  in 
this  cause?"  (Greene's  James  IV.,  act  iii.  sc.  3); 
"  This  high  promotions  "  {Ibid.,  act  i.  sc.  2)  ;  "  In  this 
semicircles"  (Battle  of  Alcazar,  act  i.  sc.  i).  But  it 
is  far  more  common  in  certain  expressions  such  as 
"this  twenty  weeks,"  "this  hundred  pounds,"  which 
are  still  in  use,  and  are  now  ordinarily  explained  on 
syntactical  grounds,  which  do  not  require  this  to  be 
regarded  as  a  plural. 

78.  Besides  this,  there  were  in  Anglo-Saxon  certain 
other  words  which  are  commonly  reckoned  as  demon- 
strative pronouns.  They  are  compounds  of  lie, '  like  : ' 
one  of  them  is  ylc,  '  same,'  which  lasted  down  to  the 
fifteenth  century  in  the  literary  language  as  ilh,  and 
then  died  out  of  common  use ;  but  it  was  preserved 
in  the  speech  of  the  North,  and  is  made  somewhat 
familiar  to  us  by  its  frequent  occurrence  in  the  poetry 
written  in  the  Scotch  dialect.  Another  of  these  demon- 
stratives was  ]>ylc,  '  that  same,'  '  that,'  which  in  Early 
English  usually  appeared  as  thilke,  and  in  Middle 
English  died  out  entirely.  Another  compound,  \ysric^ 
'  such,'  was  far  from  common  even  in  Anglo-Saxon, 
and  disappeared  early ;  but  such  was  not  the  case 
with  swilc,  which,  after  passing  through  many  inter- 
mediate forms  of  spelling,  varying  with  pronunciation, 
among  which  are  swilche,  swulche,  sulche,  swiche, 
siche,  and  soche,  finally  settled   upon   one  of  them, 


The  Pronoun.  213 

suchc,  and  has  been  retained  in  Modem  English  in 
the  form  such.  Of  these  four,  jZr  followed  the  defi- 
nite adjective-declension  in  Anglo-Saxon ;  the  other 
three,  the  indefinite  \  and  they  all  naturally  shared  in 
the  fate  that  overtook  these  inflections.  Besides  these, 
sa77ie  and  yon  are  often  reckoned  as  demonstratives  in 
Modern  English ;  but  in  the  earliest  period  of  the 
language  they  were  used  only  as  adverbs,  and  their 
employment  as  pronouns  made  its  first  appearance  in 
the  dialect  of  the  North. 

The  Personal  Pronouns. 

79.  The  following  are  the  forms  of  the  pronouns  of 
the  first,  second,  and  third  persons,  as  found  in  Anglo- 
Saxon.  The  third  person,  which  in  its  origin  was  a 
demonstrative,  is  the  only  one  that  distinguishes  gen- 
der, and  that  in  the  singular  alone. 


FIRST   PERSON. 

Singular. 

Dual. 

Plural. 

Nam. 

ic, 

wit, 

we, 

Gen. 

min, 

uncer, 

user, 

Dat. 

me, 

unc, 

us. 

Ace. 

1  m.,ic, 
I  me. 

uncit, 
unc. 

SECOND    PERSON. 

usic, 
6s. 

Singular. 

Dual. 

Plural. 

Nam. 

rm, 

git, 

ge, 

Gen. 

\m, 

incer. 

eower. 

Dat. 

l^e, 

inc. 

eow. 

Ace. 

lie. 

incit, 
inc. 

eowic, 
eow. 

214  English  Language, 


THIRD  PERSON. 

SINGULAR. 

PLURAi;. 

Masculbe. 

Feminine. 

Neuter. 

All  genders. 

Nom, 

he, 

heo, 

hit, 

hi, 

Gen. 

his, 

hire, 

his, 

hira, 

Dai. 

him, 

hire, 

him, 

him. 

\  heo. i 


Ace.       hine.      -^     '.    ^        hit.  hi. 


80.  Comparing  these  forms  with  those  found  in 
Modern  Enghsh,  it  is  evident  at  once  that  the  personal 
pronouns  have  retained  more  of  the  original  inflection 
than  either  the  noun  or  the  adjective.  It  is  they  and 
the  interrogative  who  that  alone  continue  to  make  a 
distinction  in  form  between  the  nominative  and  objec- 
tive cases.  Moreover,  whatever  losses  they  suffered, 
they  suffered  them  before  the  Middle  English  period  ; 
and  certain  general  statements  can  be  made  in  regard 
to  their  forms  as  seen  in  Anglo-Saxon,  and  as  con- 
trasted with  those  exhibited  by  them  even  in  Middle 
English. 

81.  The  most  noticeable  thing  is  the  fact,  that  in 
this,  the  earliest  form  of  the  language,  the  pronouns 
of  the  first  and  second  persons  still  continued  to  re- 
tain^ the  dual  number.  It  had  died  out  of  the  noun, 
the  adjective,  and  the  verb ;  but  in  Anglo-Saxon,  as 
in  the  other  early  Teutonic  tongues,  it  still  survived  in 
these  two  pronouns.  But  in  it,  as  likewise  in  the  others, 
it  showed  signs  of  giving  way.  Even  in  the  ninth 
and  tenth  centuries  it  was  not  unusual  to  strengthen 


The  Pronoun.  215 

the  dual  forms  by  one  of  the  words  meaning  '  both  '  or 
'■  two.'  The  nominative  dual  wit,  meaning  *  we  two,' 
received  not  unfrequently  the  word  begen  or  bu,  'both,' 
as  in  the  following  line  :  — 

Ne  forlaete  ic  J^e,  J-enden  wit  lifiaS  bu} 

Cadmon's  Genesis,  L  2256. 

Instances  also  occur  in  which  bu,  '  both/  and  twa 
or  tu,  '  two/  are  together  added  to  the  form  of  the 
dual.  As  the  number  was  by  no  means  essential  to 
expression,  its  fate  was  sealed  as  soon  as  the  force 
originally  belonging  to  it  was  felt  to  be  going.  It  sur- 
vived the  Norman  conquest,  and  lasted  down  to  the 
beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century ;  but  it  was  never 
in  any  sense  common.  In  the  thirteenth  century  it 
disappeared  entirely. 

82.  The  second  fact  to  be  noticed  is,  that  the  femi- 
nine nominative  singular  of  the  third  person,  and  all 
the  forms  of  the  plural,  have  been  entirely  supplanted 
by  the  corresponding  forms  of  the  demonstrative  pro- 
noun se,  seo,  \cBt  (72).  This  transition  began  to  take 
place  during  the  Early  English  period,  but  was  not 
fully  completed  till  the  fifteenth  century.  It  unques- 
tionably owed  its  origin  to  the  desire  of  distinguishing 
between  the  forms  of  the  pronoun,  which  had  frequently 
come  to  be  the  same  for  different  genders,  cases,  and 
numbers.  The  form  he,  for  example,  sometimes  rep- 
resents in  Early  English  the  modern  masculine  he,  the 
feminine  she,  and  the  plural  they  ;  and  likewise  him  or 

'  I  shaM  not  desert  thee  while  we  two  both  live. 


21.6  English  Language. 

hem  stands  for  the  modern  masculine  him,  the  neuter 
it,  and  the  plural  them.  The  resort  to  the  demonstra- 
tive was  not  unnatural,  and  took  place  for  the  plural 
certainly  as  early  as  the  latter  part  of  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury :  for  the  feminine  singular  the  substitution  of  the 
form  she,  derived  from  seo,  for  the  original  hed,  seems 
to  have  taken  place  later.  As  usual,  in  all  these  move- 
ments the  Northern  dialect  led  the  way ;  but  the  tri- 
umph of  the  newer  forms  was  a  very  slow  one.  Two 
sets  of  forms,  indeed,  lasted  side  by  side  for  centuries  ; 
and,  even  in  the  Middle  English, //(?;r  and  hem  are  still 
used  by  Chaucer  for  the  obhque  cases  of  the  plural ; 
while  he  employs  thei  or  they  for  the  nominative. 
Their  and  them,  however,  became  universally  adopted 
towards  the  close  of  the  fifteenth  century,  as  they  had 
long  before  been  the  prevailing  forms.  The  old  ob- 
jective hem  has  left  a  relic  of  itself  in  modern  speech 
in  the  contraction  'em,  which,  in  books  printed  in  the 
first  part  of  the  seventeenth  century,  often  appears  as 
^hem,  as  if  it  had  been  contracted  from  them,  and  were 
not  itself  the  original  form.  The  vulgar  use  of  them 
in  such  phrases  as  them  books  seems  to  be  a  relic  of 
the  ancient  adjectival  use  of  this  demonstrative  pro- 
noun. 

83.  The  third  point  to  be  marke  1  is  that  the  original 
Anglo-Saxon  accusative  has  disappeared,  and  the  mod- 
ern objective  case  is  derived,  not  from  it,  but  from  the 
dative ;  that  is  to  say,  me  comes,  for  example,  from 
the  dative  me,  and  not  the  accusative  mec ;  him,  from 
him,  and  not  from  hine  ;  her,  from  hire,  and  not  from  h\ 


The  Pronoun.  21  y 

or  hed.  The  only  exception  to  this  is  to  be  found  in 
the  neuter  pronoun  of  the  third  person,  in  which  the 
modern  form  //  has  been  derived  from  tlie  accusative, 
and  not  the  dative.  Yet  how  universal  was  the  prefer- 
ence for  the  latter  case  is  made  clear  by  the  fact,  that, 
when  the  plural  of  the  demonstrative  se  was  introduced 
into  the  pronoun  of  the  third  person,  it  was  the  dative 
]>djn, '  them,'  and  not  the  accusative  \d,  that  was  adopted 
for  the  objective.  This  disuse  of  the  accusative  began 
early.  Even  in  Anglo-Saxon  the  strengthened  forms 
7nec,  ]-iec,  usic,  and  edwic,  were  largely  discarded  for 
me,  \e,  its,  and  eow,  which  were  the  same  as  the  dative  ; 
and  the  former  died  out  immediately  after  the  Con- 
quest, if,  indeed,  they  can  be  said  to  be  existing  at  the 
time  of  it.  The  accusatives  of  the  third  person  lasted 
longer ;  but  early  in  the  twelfth  century  they  were 
sometimes  supplanted  by  the  dative,  and,  by  the  close 
of  the  thirteenth  century,  they  had  almost  universally 
been  abandoned.  In  the  neuter  pronoun  the  dative 
form  hi7n  and  the  accusative  hii  or  it  were  both  for  a 
long  period  in  use  :  indeed,  instances  of  the  former 
occur  late  in  the  sixteenth  century.  But  much  before 
that  time,  under  the  increasing  tendency  to  regard 
him  as  belonging  exclusively  to  the  mascuHne,  the 
use  of  //  for  the  neuter  became  general. 

84.  Besides  these  general  statements,  certain  special 
changes  are  to  be  noted  in  the  form  of  the  pronouns. 
In  the  first  person,  ic  often  passed,  in  Early  English, 
into  the  form  ich,  and,  toward  the  latter  part  of  it,  more 
and  more  into  the  form  /.     It  was  generally  written 


21 8  English  Language. 

for  a  long  while  with  a  small  letter ;  but,  duiing  the 
Middle  English  period,  a  capital  was  employed  to 
designate  it,  probably  for  the  sake  of  distinguishing  it 
from  the  prefix  /  of  the  passive  participle  (201),  as 
i-ron7ie.  The  preposition  in  not  infrequently  ap- 
peared also  as  /,  and  this  may  have  conduced  to  the 
speedier  adoption  of  the  distinguishing  form.  In  the 
first  part  of  the  Early  English  period  the  genitives 
of  the  first  and  second  personal  pronouns  often 
dropped  their  final  n,  and  accordingly  exhibited  the 
double  forms  min  and  mi,  thin  and  thi.  The  neuter 
hit  came  at  the  same  time  under  the  influence  of  a 
tendency  which  has  been  very  powerful  in  all  periods 
of  the  language,  and  dropped  its  initial  h.  Still  both 
it  and  hit  flourished  side  by  side  for  several  hundred 
years;  and  while,  after  the  fourteenth  century,  the 
former  became  more  common,  the  latter  did  not  die 
out  entirely  till  the  sixteenth.  A  form  ha  or  a  for  he 
made  its  appearance  at  the  beginning  of  the  Early 
English  period,  and,  though  still  found  in  the  provin  - 
cial  dialects,  is  only  of  importance  here  from  the  fact 
that  it  is  constantly  employed  by  the  Elizabethan  dram- 
atists, and  put  into  the  mouths  of  the  highest  as  well 
as  the  lowest  characters.  A  relic  of  it  is  preserved 
in  the  interjection  quotha,  that  is,  '  quoth  he.' 

85.  At  the  beginning  of  the  Middle  English  period 
the  following  paradigms  of  the  personal  pronouns  ex- 
emplify the  usage  of  Chaucer,  its  representative  author. 
In  all  cases  where  varying  forms  in  equally  common 
use  exist,  and  there  are  numbers  of  such,  those  most 


The  Pronoun. 


219 


closely  resembling  Modem   English  have  been   se« 
lected. 


FIRST 

PERSON. 

SECOND  PERSON. 

Singular. 

Plural. 

Singular. 

Plural. 

Norn. 

I, 

we, 

thou, 

ye, 

Gen, 

(min, 
(  mi. 

\ 

cure, 

j  thin, 
(thi,    s 

youre, 

Ohjec. 

me. 

us. 

thee. 

you. 

THIRD  PERSON. 

SINGULAR. 

PLURAL. 

Masculine. 

Feminine. 

Neuter. 

All  genders. 

Nom. 

he, 

she, 

\t'\ 

they, 

Gen. 

his. 

hire, 

his, 

here, 

,  Objec. 

him. 

hire. 

^\ 

hem. 

86.  That  the  Middle  English  personal  pronoun  is 
about  the  same  as  the  Modern  English,  save  in  certain 
forms  of  the  third  person,  is  evident  at  a  glance. 
Their  and  them  took  the  place  of  here  and  hem  in  the 
fifteenth  century,  as  has  been  stated.  But,  up  to  the 
seventeenth  century,  his  remained  as  the  genitive  of 
both  the  neuter  and  the  mascuHne,  just  as  the  dative 
for  both  had  for  a  long  period  been  him.  But  by  the 
end  of  the  fifteenth  century  the  h  had  become  gener- 
ally discarded  from  hit,  and,  in  consequence,  his  did 
not  seem  so  properly  the  genitive  of  //  as  of  he.  As 
the  disposition  grew  in  strength  to  regard  his  as  be- 
longing exclusively  to  the  latter,  various  methods  were 
resorted  to  in  order  to  avoid  employing  it  as  a  neuter. 


220  English  Language. 

One  of  the  earliest  of  these  was  to  use  //,  without  any 
inflection,  as  a  genitive ;  and  this  occurs  certainly  as 
early  as  the  fourteenth  century,  and  was  common  during 
the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth.  The  creation  and  gradual 
adoption  of  the  form  its  has  already  been  told,  and 
n?ed  not  be  here  repeated.^  Before  the  Restoration 
of  the  Stuarts,  in  1660,  it  had  become  firmly  estab- 
lished in  the  language ;  and,  at  the  end  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  most  men,  doubtless,  supposed  it 
had  always  been  in  existence.  Milton  is  the  principal 
writer  of  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth  century  who 
exhibits  any  reluctance  in  using  it.  As  is  well  known, 
it  is  found  but  three  times  in  his  poetry,  and  then  onh' 
where  it  is  almost  essential  to  clearness.  It,  however, 
was  sometimes  used  by  him  in  his  prose.* 

87.  One  thing  to  be  especially  marked  in  the  para- 
digms given  of  the  Middle  Enghsh  personal  pronouns 
is,  that  there  is  no  confusion  between  the  nominative 
and  objective.  In  Chaucer's  writings  —  and  the 
same  thing  is  true  of  his  contemporaries  — ye  and  you, 
for  example,  are  never  confounded.  The  former  is 
invariably  the  case  of  the  subject ;  the  latter,  the  case 
of  the  object.  Occasional  instances  of  confusion 
between  the  two  cases  have  been  pointed  out  in 
WTitings  of  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries ;  but 
they  are  so  few  in  number,  that  it  is  more  reasonable 
to  attribute  them  to  blunders  by  the  copyists  than  to 
intention  on  the  part  of  the  author.  No  such  state- 
ment can  be  made  after  the  beginning  of  the  Modem 

*  Pages  129,  X30.  '  ^S-t  Areopagitica,  Arber's  reprint,  p.  71. 


The  Pronoun.  221 

English  period.  In  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury the  distinction  between  the  nominative  and  objec- 
tive began  to  break  down.  In  fact,  if  the  language 
of  the  Elizabethan  drama  represents  fairly  the  language 
of  society,  —  and  we  can  hardly  take  any  other  view, 
• — the  wildest  license  in  the  use  of  the  personal 
pronouns  prevailed.  Me,  thee,  us,  you,  hiui,  her, 
and  them  were  often  treated  as  nominatives ;  while 
the  corresponding  nominative  forms  were  frequently, 
though  not  so  commonly,  treated  as  objectives.  Mod- 
ernized editions  of  the  authors  of  that  period  do  not 
in  this  respect  represent  justly  the  usage  of  the  time, 
as  in  all  or  nearly  all  of  them  changes  in  the  text  are 
silently  made.  In  the  case  oi  ye  and  you  this  con- 
fusion has  become  permanently  estabhshed  in  the  lan- 
guage ;  and  you,  the  representative  of  the  original 
dative  and  accusative,  has  now  become  the  regular 
form  for  both  nominative  and  objective.  Ye  is  also 
still  used,  but  likewise  indifferently  in  the  two  cases, 
and  with  comparative  infrequency  in  either.  In  the 
other  pronouns  the  original  distinction  has  gradually 
re-asserted  itself,  and  is,  perhaps,  more  strongly  insisted 
upon  now  than  at  any  period  since  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury. But  there  still  continues,  in  regard  to  these 
forms,  the  widest  conflict  of  usage  and  opinion.  Col- 
loquial phrases,  such  as,  between  you  and  J,  have 
been  handed  down  from  the  time  of  Queen  Elizabeth  ; 
while  the  expressions,  //  is  me.  It  is  him,  It  is  her, 
have  been  pretty  steadily  in  use  since  that  period,  and 
frequently  by  the  best  writers.     It  is  to  be  added  that 


222  English  Language, 

the  expressions,  It  is  /,  //  is  //<?,  and  the  similar  ones, 
are  not  older  than  the  fifteenth  century.  The  form  in 
Anglo-Saxon  was,  for  example,  /  am  it  {ic  com  hit), 
and  this  continued  to  be  employed  down  to  the  time 
mentioned. 

88.  It  has  already  been  remarked  that  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  genitives  min  and  ]nn  frequently  dropped  their 
n  in  the  Early  English  period.  Precisely  correspond- 
ing in  form  to  these  genitives  were  the  adjective  pro- 
nouns jni?t  and  \n7t,  which  had  a  full  set  of  inflections, 
according  to  the  indefinite  declension,  but  which  also 
dropped  the  final  n  at  the  same  time.  Corresponding 
to  the  genitive  plurals,  also,  were  the  adjective  pronouns 
tire  or  -dser,  'our/  and  edwer,  'your.'  The  corre- 
sponding adjective  pronoun  of  the  third  person  was 
sin ;  but,  even  when  Anglo-Saxon  was  committed  to 
writing,  it  had  died  out  nearly,  as  the  original  third 
personal  pronoun  itself  had  died  out  wholly,  and  been 
replaced  by  the  demonstrative  he.  Sin  occurs  not  often 
under  any  circumstances,  and  almost  wholly  in  poetry, 
though  it  is  not  unknown  to  prose.^  Its  loss  has  been  a 
serious  disadvantage  to  the  precision  and  clearness  of 
the  language ;  for  while  its  place  was  taken  in  Anglo- 
Saxon  by  the  genitives  his,  hire,  and  hira  of  the  third 
personal  pronoun,  it  was  not  filled. 

8g.  These  genitives  of  the  first  and  second  persona] 
pronouns  were,  therefore,  the  same  in  form  as  the 
nominative  singular  of  the  corresponding  possessive 
pronouns    during   the   Anglo-Saxon   period.     But,   as 

1  E.g.,  Blickling  Homilies,  p,  125,  1.  ax. 


The  Pronoun.  223 

then  the  former  were  governed  directly  by  verbs  or 
prepositions,  while  the  latter  had  full  adjective  inflec- 
tions, the  distinction  between  them  was  in  most  cases 
apparent.  But  when,  on  the  one  hand,  the  genitive 
became  more  and  more  confined  to  the  expression  of 
the  possessive  relation,  and  was  no  longer  made  the 
object  of  verbs  and  prepositions ;  and  when,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  adjective  inflection  of  the  possessive 
pronoun  had  entirely  disappeared,  —  then  the  distinc- 
tion between  the  two  classes  became  rather  nominal 
than  real.  Whether  the  same  word  should  be  regarded 
as  the  genitive  of  the  personal  pronoun,  or  itself  as  the 
possessive  adjective  pronoun,  depended  mainly  upon 
definition.  The  genitive,  especially  in  the  plural, 
lasted  down,  to  be  sure,  to  the  end  of  the  fourteenth 
century,  in  phrases  in  which  there  could  be  no  doubt 
as  to  its  being  a  personal  pronoun,  such  as,  at  07i7'e 
alther  cost^  meaning  "  at  the  cost  of  us  all ;  "  or,  I  am 
yowre  aller  hed,  I  am  yowre  alter  hcle^  that  is,  ''  I  am 
the  head  of  you  all,  I  am  the  salvation  {heat)  of  you 
all."  But  such  expressions  as  these,  comparatively 
infrequent  then,  have  not  been  preserved  in  Modern 
English  :  hence  many  grammarians  consider  the  geni- 
tive of  the  personal  pronouns  as  no  longer  existing, 
terming  these  forms,  wherever  they  occur,  possessive 
adjective  pronouns.  In  either  case  their  history  is  the 
same. 

90.  The  contracted  forms  mi  and  thi,  for  771111  and 

*  Chaucer:  Canterbury  Tale,  Prologue,  1.  799. 
'  Langlande's  Piers  Plowman,  text  B.,  xix.  468. 


224  English  Language. 

thin,  made  their  appearance  at  the  end  of  the  twelfth 
century,  and  were  at  first  used  indifferendy.  Subse- 
quently, in  the  Middle  Enghsh  period,  a  custom  sprang 
up  of  using  min  and  thin  before  words  beginning 
with  a  vowel  or  silent  /z,  and  mi  and  thi  before  conso- 
nants. This  was  observed,  with  a  fair  degree  of  regu- 
larity, up  to  the  latter  half  of  the  sixteenth  century,  after 
which  it  became  largely  a  matter  of  individual  choice. 
In  process  of  time  my  and  thy,  as  they  had  then  gen- 
erally come  to  be  spelled,  were  used  almost  exclusively 
before  nouns,  and  mine  and  thine  when  standing  alone 
in  the  predicate,  except  in  a  few  phrases,  such  as 
'mine  host,'  that  had  survived  the  general  abandon- 
ment of  the  ancient  usage.  The  e  of  mijie  and  thine 
is,  of  course,  inorganic,  and  may  have  come  from  its 
being  used  to  distinguish,  after  the  manner  of  the 
adjective  inflection,  the  plural  from  the  singular. 

91.  The  restriction  of  mine  and  thine  to  the  abso- 
lute construction  in  the  predicate  was  undoubtedly 
aided,  to  a  great  extent,  by  the  creation  of  the  forms 
cures,  yoiires,  and  hires,  Miers,'  and  heres,  'theirs,* 
and  their  confinement  to  this  same  employment.  Origi- 
nally the  pronoun,  when  used  absolutely  in  the  predi- 
cate, had  simply  the  form  of  the  genitive  of  the  per- 
sonal pronoun,  or  the  nominative  of  the  possessive  ;  and 
this  was  the  prevalent  practice,  not  only  in  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  period,  but  during  the  Early  English  period 
also,  at  least  in  the  Midland  and  Southern  dialects. 
For  example,  the  sentence  '  the  land  is  ours '  would 
in  the  thirteenth  century  have  appeared  as  '  the  land 


The  Pronotifi.  x^^     of  Tuaas  ■ 

is  oure.^  The  feeling,  that,  in  sucfr  constructions,  the 
pronouns  were  really  genitives  of  tn^^personal  pronoun, 
and  not  possessive  adjectives,  seems  to  have  been  the 
ruling  one.  But  as,  by  the  fourteenth  century,  s  had 
become  the  common  termination  of  the  genitive  of  all 
nouns,  and  was  the  termination  of  his,  the  masculine 
and  neuter  genitive  of  the  third  personal  pronoun,  this 
letter  was  at  last  added  by  a  false  analogy  to  the 
other  forms,  and,  early  in  the  Middle  English  period, 
oures,  youres,  hires,  Miers,'  heres,  'theirs,'  took  their 
place  alongside  of  the  earlier  oiur,  youre,  hire,  and 
he7'e.  The  former,  therefore,  are  strictly  double  geni- 
tives. They  first  made  their  appearance  in  the  speech 
of  the  North,  but,  in  the  fourteenth  century,  became 
thoroughly  established  in  the  literary  language  of  the 
Midland  dialect.  For  a  time  they  flourished  side  by 
side  with  the  forms  without  s,  which  etymologically 
were  more  correct ;  but  in  the  fifteenth  century  they 
displaced  the  latter  altogether,  and  are  now  the  ones 
exclusively  in  use  in  the  construction  mentioned. 
When  their  was  adopted  as  the  genitive  of  the  per- 
sonal pronoun,  in  place  of  here,  it  also  added  an  s  in 
such  cases,  like  the  others. 

92.  This  result  did  not  happen,  however,  without  a 
stmggle.  Other  forms  existed,  which  have  left  traces 
of  themselves,  in  the  language  -of  the  uneducated,  to 
this  day.  The  old  n  declension,  both  of  the  noun 
and  adjective,  still  survived  in  the  fourteenth  century 
in  certain  parts  of  the  country,  and  was,  as  we  have 
seen,  applied  to  words  which  had  no  right  to  it  in 


226  English  Laitguage. 

Anglo-Saxon.  Various  dialects,  consequently,  espe- 
cially of  the  South  of  England,  instead  of  forming,  in 
these  cases,  a  double  genitive  in  s,  formed  one  in  n  ;  so 
that,  in  place  of  oures,youres,  hires,  and  heres,  we  had 
the  forms  owen,  yonren,  hiren,  heren  (i.e.,  their'n). 
To  this  the  analogy  of  mine  and  thine  unquestionably 
contributed.  These  are  not  infrequent  in  the  Wycliff- 
ite  version  of  the  Bible,  made  about  1380.  In  con- 
sequence, during  the  latter  half  of  the  fourteenth 
century,  the  genitive  of  the  personal  pronoun,  when 
used  in  the  predicate,  can  be  found  in  three  forms,  — 
without  any  ending,  with  the  ending  s,  or  with  the 
ending  n.  The  following  examples  will  show  this 
clearly :  — 

I  wil  be  youre  in  al  that  ever  I  may. 

Canterbury  Tales,  line  13,176. 
My  gold  is  yoiires,  whanne  that  you  lest. 

Ib.,  Ihie  14,695. 

But  the  erthetilleris  seiden  togidere,  This  is  the  eire ;  come 

ye,  sle  we  hym,  and  the  eritage  schal  be  oitrun.  —  Mark  xii.  8. 

The  forms  in  n,  however,  speedily  disappeared  from 
the  language  of  literature,  though  they  have  exhibited 
a  marked  vitality  in  the  language  of  low  life.  Here, 
again,  whenever  their  took  the  place  of  here,  their'n 
was  formed,  after  the  analogy  of  the  other  forms  in  n, 
by  those  who  employed  the  latter.  In  fact,  this  vas 
sometimes  extended  to  his,  giving  us  hisen  or  his  Vz  as 
a  collateral  form.  These  forms  in  n,  it  is  to  be  added, 
are  often  falsely  explained  as  contractions  of  our 
own,  your  own,  her  own,  and  so  forth. 


The  Pronoun.  227 

93.  In  Anglo-Saxon  the  simple  personal  pronouns 
were  constantly  employed  also  as  reflexives ;  and  this 
use  of  them  has  lasted  down  through  all  periods  of 
the  language  to  this  day.  But  the  reflexive  sense  of 
these  words  was  also  made  often  more  emphatic  in 
the  early  tongue  by  the  addition  of  the  forms  of  the 
adjective  self  to  the  corresponding  forms  of  the  per- 
sonal pronouns ;  thus  the  dative  hi7nself  would  be  in 
Anglo-Saxon  him  selfmn  ;  the  accusative,  hine  selfne. 
During  the  Early  English  period  the  adjective  self  lost 
its  inflections,  and,  both  then  and  later,  was,  in  these 
combinations,  often  looked  upon,  in  consequence,  as  a 
substantive.  In  its  simple  form  self  it  was  at  first 
usually  added  to  the  dative  of  aU  the  personal  pro- 
nouns;  but  in  process  of  time,  while,  with  the  pro- 
nouns of  the  third  person,  it  was  joined  with  the 
objective,  with  the  pronouns  of  the  first  and  second 
persons  it  was  joined  to  the  genitive ;  or,  perhaps,  it 
would  be  more  correct  to  say  it  was  treated  as  a 
substantive,  with  which  agreed  the  possessive  adjective 
pronouns  corresponding  to  the  genitive  of  the  pro- 
nouns of  the  first  and  second  persons.  This  took 
place  before  the  beginning  of  the  Middle  English 
period,  and  has  since  remained  unchanged,  though 
forms  like  his  self  and  me  j-^^  respectively,  occasionally 
occur  much  later  even.  The  only  modification  that 
for  a  long  time  took  place  was  the  frequent  adding  of 
the  inflectional  syllable  en,  giving  such  forms  as  my- 
selveriy  himselven.  This  termination,  however,  did  not 
denote  the  plural,  which  was  not  developed  till  near 


228  English  Language. 

the  end  of  the  Middle  Engh'sh  period  :  ^  themselves, 
for  illustration,  during  nearly  the  whole  of  the  fifteenth 
century,  would  be  represented  either  by  hemse/f  or 
themself.  But  in  the  first  half  of  the  sixteenth  century 
the  plural  ending  s  was  added  to  the  forms  which  were 
plural  in  signification.  The  strengthened  form  of  the 
reflexive  is  generally  used  now  when  the  pronoun 
is  the  direct  object  of  the  verb ;  but,  when  it  is  the 
object  of  some  preposition  accon^panying  the  verb, 
the  simple  form  is  more  common  ^  thus  we  ?ay,  '■  he 
laid  himself  down,'  rather  than  'he  laid  him  down,' 
and,  on  the  contrary,  'he  looked  about  him,'  rather 
than  'he  looked  about  himself: '  but  both  expressions 
have  been  constantly  employed  from  the  earliest 
period. 

94.  There  remains  one  usage  the  consideration  of 
which  belongs  more  strictly  to  syntax  than  even  the 
one  just  mentioned ;  but,  as  it  is  of  some  importance 
as  connected  with  the  disuse  of  certain  forms  of  the 
verb,  it  will  receive  a  slight  notice  at  this  point.  This 
is  the  general  abandonment  in  English  of  the  singular 
pronoun  of  the  second  person,  and  the  substitution  of 
the  plural  in  its  place.  In  this  respect  our  tongue 
does  not  differ  from  the  other  cultivated  tongues  of 
modern  Europe ;  but,  in  its  avoidance  of  this  particu- 
lar form,  it  has  gone  far  beyond  them  all.  In  them  it 
is  the  language  of  superiority,  or  affectionate  intimacy ; 
with  us  it  is,  outside  of  its  employment  in  poetry, 
limited,  for  all  practical  purposes,  to  the  language  of 
prayer.     This  result  has  been  reached  gradually.     The 


The  Pronoun,  229 

Anglo-Saxon,  like  the  Greek  and  the  Latin,  never  used, 
in  addressing  an  individual,  any  thing  but  the  second 
person  of  the  singular ;  and  this  continued  to  be  the 
case  for  nearly  two  centuries  after  the  Conquest.  The 
substitution  of  the  plural  ye  and  you  in  such  cases 
made  its  appearance  towards  the  close  of  the  thir- 
teenth century;  but  it  was  then  not  merely  little  in 
use,  it  was  restricted  to  narrow  and  well-defined  limits. 
When  so  substituted,  it  was  generally,  if  not  invariably, 
employed  as  a  mark  of  respect  in  addressing  a  supe- 
rior. In  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries  the  use 
of  the  plural  steadily  increased,  and  in  the  sixteenth 
century  it  became  the  standard  form  of  polite  conver- 
sation. All  this  led  to  the  greater  disuse  of  thou; 
and,  as  thou  was  almost  the  only  subject  the  second 
person  of  the  verb  ever  had,  the  disuse  of  the  pronoun 
led  indirecdy  to  the  comparative  disuse  of  this  form 
of  the  verb,  and,  in  some  instances,  to  changes  that 
were  due  to  the  lack  of  familiarity  with  the  proper 
form  in  consequence  of  this  disuse. 

The  Interrogative  Pronouns. 

95.  In  the  Anglo-Saxon  period  the  interrogative 
pronouns  were  hwa,  '  who  ; '  hwcet,  '  what ; '  hwilCy 
'  of  what  sort ; '  and  hwce^er,  'which  of  two.'  During 
the  twelfth  century  the  words  which  had  originally 
begun  with  the  combination  hw  changed  their  form, 
and  were  spelled  with  wh ;  and  this  has  from  that 
time  remained  the  universal  practice.     Of  these  four 


230  English  Language. 

interrogatives,  hwilc  and  hwce<Ser  had  a  full  set  of 
adjective  inflections  according  to  the  indefinite  declen- 
sion, varying  therefore  with  the  gender.  On  the  other 
hand,  hwa  was  used  both  as  a  masculine  and  a  femi- 
nine, the  special  feminine  form  which  belonged  to  the 
primitive  Teutonic  having  disappeared  from  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  and  from  the  other  sister-languages,  with  the 
exception  of  the  Gothic.  Of  course,  hwcet  is  strictly 
the  neuter  of  hwa. 

96.  In  Anglo-Saxon,  hwa  and  hwcet  have  the  follow- 
ing inflections :  — 


ilasculin 

e  and  Feminine. 

Neuter. 

Nom, 

hwa, 

hwset, 

Gen. 

hwses, 

hwses, 

Dat. 

hwam, 

hwam, 

Ace. 

hwone. 

hwjet, 

hist. 

hwv. 

97.  In  general  it  can  be  said  thiat  this  pronoun  has 
had  the  same  history  essentially  as  the  personal  pro- 
nouns, especially  the  pronoun  of  the  third  person.  In 
the  Early  EngHsh  period  the  dative  hwam,  'whom,' 
supplanted  the  accusative  hwone  in  the  masculine,  as 
him  did  hine.  As  hi7n  gradually  became  confined  to 
this  gender,  and  the  accusative  hit  or  //  took  its  place 
in  the  neuter,  so  whom  came,  even  earlier,  to  be  used 
only  of  persons,  and  the  accusative  what  was  alone 
used  when  objects  without  life  were  mentioned. 
Again  :  just  as  his  lost  its  original  neuter  sense,  and 
was  replaced  by  its,  so  whose  has  been  limited  to  per- 
sons j  and,  when  inquiry  is  made  in  regard  to  things, 


The  Pronoun.  23 1 

we  now  employ  in  place  of  it  what  or  which,  with  the 
preposition  of.  So,  also,  in  the  sixteenth  century,  the 
same  confounding  of  the  nominative  and  objective 
cases  that  occurred  with  the  personal  pronouns  oc- 
curred also  with  this  interrogative.  Who7n  is  some- 
times used  where  strict  grammar  requires  who  ;  but  far 
more  frequently  was  who  used  where  whofn  would  be 
the  form  expected.  This  is  especially  true  of  the 
Elizabethan  period.  In  the  dramatic  writings  of  that 
time  sentences  such  as  these  — 

Who  have  we  here.?  —  Peele's  Edzvard I. 
Who  do  you  take  me  to  be  ?  —  Greene's  George  a-Greene. 
I   see  who  he  laughed  at.  — Jonson's   Every  Man   in  his 
Humor. 

are  of  constant  occurrence ;  and  the  frequency  with 
which  they  are  used  by  writers  of  every  grade  is  clear 
proof  that  they  were  not  felt  to  be  improper.  Nor  has 
this  usage  of  who  for  whom  been  limited  to  this  period. 
It  may  be  said  to  have  characterized  the  colloquial 
speech  of  England  from  the  latter  half  of  the  sixteenth 
century  to  the  present  time,  if  the  language  of  con- 
versation has  been  justly  represented  in  the  Hterature 
which  purports  to  reproduce  it. 

98.  Hwilc  was  represented  in  the  dialects  and  sub- 
dialects  of  Early  English  by  various  forms,  such  as 
whiik,  whutk,  wuch,  wich,  and  which,  the  last  of  these 
becoming  in  Middle  English  the  established  form  in 
the  language  of  literature.  Like  such  (78),  it  is  a 
compound  of  lie,  '  like,'  and  it  was  originally  inflected 
according  to  the  indefinite  declension  of  the  adjective, 


232  English  Language. 

and  the  history  of  its  forms  is  included  in  the  history 
of  that  part  of  speech.  The  same  statement  is  true 
also  of  the  interrogative  hwcE^er,  'which  of  two/ 
which  was  originally  inflected  like  the  indefinite  adjec- 
tive. The  dual  sense  of  this  word  was  beginning  to 
fail  even  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  period,  and  in  conse- 
quence it  was  sometimes  strengthened  by  the  numeral, 
as  in  Matthew,  chapter  xxi.  verse  31,  where,  ia  the 
Anglo-Saxon  version,  we  read,  — 

Hwae'6er  j:ara  twegra  dyde  paes  fxder  willan? 

which,  in  the  sixteenth-century  translation,  now  used 
by  us,  has  the  same  construction  :  "  Whether  of  them 
twain  did  the  will  of  his  father?  "  The  use  of  whether 
as  an  interrogative  pronoun  steadily  gave  way,  and  died 
out  in  the  seventeenth  century  entirely.  Its  place  was 
taken  by  which. 

99.  An  interrogative  pronoun,  signifying  "who  of 
many,"  existed  in  the  primitive  Teutonic,  and  was 
transmitted  to  the  Gothic  and  the  Old  Norse,  but  was 
not  preserved  in  any  dialect  of  the  High  Germanic  or 
the  Low  Germanic  groups.  Compound  forms  of  the 
interrogatives  have  been  in  use  during  every  period  of 
English ;  but  the  inflectyDn  of  the  simple  forms  has 
not  been  in  the  least  modified  by  this  fact.  In  con- 
clusion, it  is  to  be  remarked  that  the  instrumental  case 
of  hwcet  (96)  has  given  to  the  tongue  the  two  inter- 
rogative adverbs  how  and  why. 


The  Pronoun.  •233 

The  Relative  Pronouns. 

100.  The  Teutonic  did  not  possess  a  relative  in  the 
strict  sense  of  the  word ;  and,  for  the  representation 
of  it,  the  Enghsh,  during  every  period  of  its  history, 
has  been  obnged  to  have  recourse  to  other  pronouns. 
In  Anglo-Saxon  the  duty  of  the  relative  was  performed 
by  the  following  words  or  phrases  :  — 

1.  By  the  correlative  form  of  the  demonstrative  se^ 
the  indeclinable  \e.  As  this  was  indeclinable,  it  could 
be  employed  for  an  antecedent  in  any  gender,  number, 
or  person. 

2.  By  the  demonstrative  pronoun  se,  seo,  \cet. 

3.  By  the  joining  of  the  indeclinable  \e  to  the  form 
of  the  demonstrative,  giving,  for  example,  in  the  nomi- 
native singular,  se  \e,  seo  \e,  \cet  \e^  or  \(ztte. 

4.  Sometimes,  though  far  less  commonly,  by  the 
joining  of  \e  to  the  personal  pronouns. 

loi.  After  the  Conquest  the  use  of  \e  was  the  first 
to  be  given  up,  —  a  result  which  was  unavoidably 
hastened  by  the  disposition  to  employ  that  form  ex- 
clusively for  the  definite  article :  still  it  was  used 
occasionally  as  late  as  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth 
century.  All  the  forms  of  the  demonstrative  se,  seo^ 
\(Et,  were  maintained  as  relatives  down  to  the  end  of 
the  twelfth  century  with  a  fair  degree  of  vitality ;  but 
the  only  one  that  was  much  in  use  was  the  neuter 
nominative  and  accusative  singular,  which  speedily 
took  the  place  of  the  old  indeclinable  \e  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  all  persons,  genders,  numbers,  and  cases. 


234  English  Langtiage. 

By  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century  the  use  of 
that  as  a  general  relative,  referring  both  to  persons  and 
things,  was  universally  established,  and  such  it  has 
remained  through  every  subsequent  period  of  English. 
Other  words  have  taken  their  place  alongside  of  it ; 
but  there  has  never  been  a  time  since  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury when  it  has  not  been  in  constant  employment  as 
a  relative. 

102.  With  this  form  alone,  however,  the  language 
was  not  content,  and  at  an  early  period  it  began  to 
resort  to  the  interrogative  pronouns  for  additional 
relatives.  The  first  that  came  into  general  use  was 
which.  The  employment  of  this  interrogative  as  a 
relative  goes  back  to  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth 
century,  and  by  the  end  of  the  fourteenth  it  was 
thoroughly  established.  It  was  sometimes  preceded 
by  the  definite  article,  giving  us  the  expression  the 
which  ;  it  was  sometimes  followed  by  that;  but  it  was 
more  frequently  used  alone. ^  From  the  fourteenth  to 
the  seventeenth  century  it  was  as  regularly  employed 
in  reference  to  persons  as  to  things,  an  idiom  which 
had  been  made  familiar  to  all  by  the  phrase  "  Our 
Father  which  art  in  heaven,"  occurring  in  the  Lord's 

1  The  use  of  which  as  a  relative  without  that  was  common  in  the  four- 
teenth centuiy;  but,  as  the  assertion  is  frequently  made  that  such  is  not  the 
case,  it  has  been  thought  best  to  add  the  following  references,  which  might  be 
multiplied  indefinitely,  —  in  Chaucer's  Parlament  of  Foules,  lines  29,  34,  84, 
III,  126,  136,  142,  170,  248,  287,  333,  395;  in  Purvey's  Recension  of  tha 
Wycliffite  Version  of  the  Bible,  Mark  ii.  4;  iii.  28;  iv.  16,  20,  31;  v.  3;  vi.  2; 
viii.  5,  28;  ix.  2;  X.  5,  30,  38-40;  xi.  2;  xii.  14,  40;  xiii.  2,  19,  20;  xiv.  24; 
XV.  40,  42;  xvi.  10;  Dan.  i.  4,  18,  20;  ii.  11,  23,  28,  38,  41;  iii.  2-5,  7,  12-15, 
18,  27,  28,  31,  36,  52,  88,  91,  &c. 


The  Pronoun,  235 

Prayer.  In  the  seventeenth  century  the  tendency 
manifested  itself,  with  the  increasing  use  of  who  as  a 
relative,  to  confine  the  reference  of  which  to  things ; 
and  this  has  now  become  the  general  practice  in  the 
language,  though  exceptions  are  still  to  be  met  with, 
especially  in  poetry.  It  shows  how  thoroughly  the 
sense  of  the  ancient  usage,  had  been  lost,  and  how 
complete  the  distinction  between  the  two  pronouns 
had  become  in  tne  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury, that  this  particular  expression  quoted  above  was 
attacked  by  Steele  in  No.  78  of  "The  Spectator," 
which  appeared  in  May,  1 7 1 1 .  He  appended  to  this 
paper  "the  humble  petition  of  who  and  which'' 
wherein  a  protest  was  uttered  both  against  the  con- 
stant employment  of  that  instead  of  them  as  a  relative, 
and  against  their  being  confounded  with  each  other. 
"  In  the  first  and  best  prayer  children  are  taught,"  says 
the  petition,  "  they  learn  to  misuse  us.  '  Our  Father 
which  art  in  heaven '  should  be  '  our  Father  who  art  in 
heaven  ; '  and  even  a  convocation,  after  long  debates, 
refused  to  consent  to  an  alteration  of  it." 

103.  About  as  early  as  which,  whose,  and  whom,  the 
oblique  cases  of  the  interrogative  who  were  also  used 
as  relatives.  This  practice  may  be  said  to  have  begun 
early  in  the  thirteenth  century,  and  to  have  steadily 
increased  in  use  from  that  time.  But  it  was  not  till 
the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century  that  the  use  of 
the  nominative  who  as  a  relative  was  established, 
though  occasional  instances  of  such  an  employment 
of  it  occur  earher.     Nor  was  who^  even  during  the 


236  English  Lariguage. 

sixteenth  century,  common  as  a  relative,  though  con« 
stantly  becoming  more  so ;  but  in  the  seventeenth 
century  it  came  into  general  use.  From  the  beginning 
it  had  not  been  limited  to  persons,  but  also  referred  to 
things.  From  the  latter,  however,  it  was  gradually  shut 
out  by  the  distinction  that  gradually  developed  itself 
between  it  and  which,  in  accordance  wherewith  the 
former  was  confined  to  personal  and  the  latter  to 
impersonal  antecedents.  In  this  matter  the  objective 
tvJiom  has  the  same  history  as  the  nominative  who ; 
but  the  genitive  whose  has,  during  all  the  periods  of 
Modem  English,  been  applied  equally  to  persons  and 
to  things.  In  the  latter  usage  it  is  etymologically  the 
genitive,  not  of  who,  but  of  what  (96)  ;  but  in  sense 
it  corresponds  to  '  of  which.' 

104.  The  confusion  between  the  nominative  and 
objective  of  the  interrogative  who  naturally  extended 
itself  to  the  word  when  used  as  a  relative.  In  one 
instance  the  confusion  has  perpetuated  itself  to  our 
own  time,  and  has  become  established  in  usage.  This 
is  in  the  phrase  than  whom,  which  has  been  both 
common  and  classical  from  the  latter  half  of  the  six- 
teenth century.  Modern  grammarians,  in  this  case, 
are  often  disposed  in  consequence  to  treat  than,  not  as 
a  conjunction,  but  as  a  preposition. 

105.  The  indefinite  pronouns,  as  has  been  stated, 
had  either  the  inflection  of  the  noun  or  of  the  adjec- 
tive, usually  the  latter.  Those  which  existed  in  Anglo- 
Saxon,  excluding  the  compound  forms,  have  been 
transmitted  to  Modem  English,  with  two  exceptions ; 


The  Pivnotm.  22,7 

these  are/^/iZ,  'many,'  and  i7tan,  'one.'  The  former, 
in  Early  English,  passed  into  the  form  fele  ;  the  latter, 
into  me?t,  or,  with  the  n  dropped,  into  me ;  and  both 
died  out  in  the  fifteenth  century.  Hzua,  '  some  one,' 
was  in  Anglo-Saxon  also  used  as  an  indefinite  pro* 
noun,  and  lasted  down  to  the  seventeenth  century  in 
certain  phrases,  such  as,  "as  who  should  say,"  which, 
indeed,  in  poetry,  are  not  yet  entirely  obsolete.  An- 
other indefinite  pronoun,  an,  '  a  certain,'  was  also  the 
numeral  'one,'  and,  even  during  the  Anglo-Saxon 
period,  had  sometimes  the  force  merely  of  the  indefi- 
nite article.  Its  confinement  to  this  usage  became 
more  thoroughly  established  after  the  Norman  con- 
quer4  ;  and  in  Early  English  the  custom  arose  of  drop- 
ping the  final  «  before  vowels,  or  a  silent  h,  which, 
with  slight  exceptions,  has  been  followed  to  the  present 
day. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  VERB. 
THE  TEUTONIC  VERB.      GENERAL   STATEMENTS. 

106.  To  all  the  Teutonic  languages  the  following 
parts  of  the  verb  were  common  from  the  earliest  period 
of  their  history  :  — 

1.  Two  leading  conjugations. 

2.  One  voice,  —  the  active. 

3.  Three  finite  moods.  These  are  the  indicative, 
the  subjunctive,  —  sometimes  called  the  conjunctive, 
and  corresponding  to  the  Greek  optative,  —  and  the 
imperative. 

4.  An  infinitive,  and  an  active  and  a  passive  par- 
iciple. 

5.  Two  simple  tenses,  —  the  present  and  the  pret- 
erite. 

6.  Two  numbers,  —  the  singular  and  the  plural. 

7.  Three  persons,  —  the  first,  second,  and  third. 

107.  Besides  these  forms  common  to  all,  the  Gothic 
retained  a  middle  voice  (used  generally  in  a  passive 


The    Verb.  239 

sense)  and  a  dual  number  (confined  to  the  first  and 
second  persons).  The  primitive  method  of  forming 
the  preterite  by  reduphcation,  exempHfied  also  in  Latin 
by  fiuch  forms  as  mordeo,  mo-mordi^  tundo,  tu-tudi, 
it  likewise  preserved  in  some  forty  verbs ;  but  of  this 
traces  only  can  be  found  in  the  other  Teutonic  lan- 
guages. 

108.  Excluding  the  Gothic,  the  Teutonic  has  ac- 
cordingly lost,  of  ^he  parts  belonging  to  the  primitive 
Indo-European  verb,  the  middle  voice  (also  used  as  a 
passive),  the  mood  corresponding  to  the  Greek  sub- 
junctive, the  imperfect,  aorist,  and  futuie  tenses,  and 
the  dual  number. 

I  eg.  According  to  its  method  of  forming  the  pret- 
erite, the  Teutonic  verb  is  divided  into  two  great 
conjugations.  One  is  variously  called  the  Old,  the 
Primary,  or  the  Strong  conjugation ;  the  other,  the 
New,  the  Secondary,  or  the  Weak  conjugation.  The 
distinguishing  characteristic  is,  that  verbs  of  the  latter 
conjugation  add  an  additional  syllable  to  the  root  to 
form  the  preterite.  This  additional  syllable,  in  some 
modern  Teutonic  tongues,  noticeably  in  English,  has 
been,  in  many  cases,  cut  down  to  a  single  letter. 
Examples  of  this  conjugation  are  words  like  kill, 
kill-ed,  love,  love-d.  On  the  other  hand,  verbs  of  the 
former  conjugation  add  nothing  to  form  the  preterite. 
Thus,  in  Anglo-Saxon,  singan  meant  ^  to  sing : '  the 
present  tense,  first  person  singular,  was  sing-e ;  the 
preterite  of  the  same  person  was  sang.  No  syllable 
was  added,  as  in  the  case  of  kill  and  love.     But  to  this 


240  E^iglish  Language. 

conjugation  belongs  a  variation  of  the  radical  vowel, 
which,  in  the  instance  just  cited,  is  exemplified  by  the 
change  of  i  to  a.  This  is,  indeed,  one  of  its  most 
marked  features,  and  one  which  has  been  preserved  in 
its  whole  subsequent  history.  But  as  variation  of  the 
vowel,  though  not  due  to  the  &ame  cause,  is  found  in 
a  few  verbs  of  the  conjugation  which  adds  a  syllable  to 
form  the  preterite,  this  variation  cannot  be  regarded 
as  a  distinctive  peculiarity.  Thus,  the  Anglo-Saxon 
present  sell-e  has  for  its  preterite  seal-de,  the  e  of 
the  one  tense  having  become  ea  in  the  other;  and 
Modern  English  still  retains  this  peculiarity  in  the 
present  sell  and  the  preterite  sol-d.  Accordingly, 
it  is  the  adding,  or  not  adding,  of  a  syllable,  which  is 
the  original  fundamental  distinction  between  the  two 
conjugations,  and  not  the  variation  of  vowel. 

no.  The  terms  Old  and  Primary  are  employed 
because  the  verbs  belonging  to  the  conjugation  so- 
called  are  the  primitive  verbs  of  the  Teutonic.  It  is 
from  them,  or  from  nouns,  that  the  verbs  of  the  New 
or  Secondary  conjugation  have  been  derived,  and  their 
name  corresponds  to  their  origin.  The  terms  Strong 
and  Weak  were  first  applied  by  Grimm,  on  the  theory 
that  verbs  of  the  one  conjugation  expressed  the  idea 
of  past  time  by  a  mere  modification  of  their  own 
resources,  that  is,  by  changing  the  radical  vowel ; 
while  those  of  the  other  had  to  call  in  the  help  of  an 
additional  syllable  to  achieve  the  same  result.  Though 
this  terminology  is  somewhat  fanciful,  it  is  convenient, 
and  has  come  into  general  use,  and  in  this  treatise 


The    Verb.  241 

rvill  be  ordinarily  employed.  The  terms  Regular  and 
Irregular,  found  generally  in  English  grammars,  are 
scientifically  incorrect,  because  they  blend  in  one  class 
the  strong  verbs  and  the  anomalous  verbs  of  the  weak 
conjugation. 

111.  The  syllable  which  is  added  to  form  the  pret- 
erite of  verbs  of  the  weak  conjugation  is  supposed, 
according  to  the  generally  received  theory,  to  be  the 
reduplicated  perfect  of  a  verb  corresponding  to  the 
English  verb  do.  In  Anglo-Saxon  the  infinitive  of 
this  was  don,  and  its  preterite,  dide,  the  present  did : 
in  Old  High  German  the  corresponding  forms  were 
iuon  and  teta.  The  reduplicated  form  of  this  verb  is 
not  preserved  in  its  complete  state  in  the  preterites  of 
any  of  the  weak  verbs  in  the  Teutonic  languages, 
except  in  Gothic;  and  there  it  is  not  found  in  the 
singular,  but  is  found  in  the  dual  and  plural.  For 
illustration,  the  first  person  plural  of  the  preterite  of 
the  Gothic  verb  haban,  'to  have,'  is  habai-dcdu7n, 
which  is  strictly  have-did-we,  equivalent  to  we  did 
have. 

112.  One  further  distinction  also  exists  between 
the  strong  and  the  weak  conjugation.  This  is  in  the 
passive  participle.  In  the  former,  the  suffix  was  -an, 
usually  weakened  into  -en,  as  seen  still  in  the  Enghsh 
d7'iv-en  :  for  the  latter  it  was  -d  or  -/,  as  seen  in  Eng- 
lish love-d,  taugh-t. 

113.  These  are  characteristics  which  English  shares 
with  all  the  other  Teutonic  languages.  In  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  these  two  conjugations  above  described,  with 


242  English  Language. 

all  their  distinctive  peculiarities,  were  flourishing,  and 
they  have  lasted  down  to  the  present  time.  But  in 
the  course  of  their  history  great  changes  have  taken 
place  in  their  relative  size  and  importance.  The  most 
obvious  fact  is,  that  verbs  of  the  strong  conjugation 
have  in  Modern  English  become  so  few,  and  verbs  of 
the  weak  conjugation  so  numerous,  that  the  former, 
when  compared  with  the  latter,  are  apt  to  seem,  like 
exceptions  to  the  general  rule.  Many  strong  verbs 
have  disappeared  altogether ;  many  have  passed  over 
to  the  weak  conjugation ;  a  few  have  complete  forms 
of  both  conjugations  ;  in  others,  again,  the  conjugations 
have  been  confounded,  the  preterite  being  formed 
according  to  the  one,  and  the  past  participle  according 
to  the  other ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  a  still  smaller 
number  have  passed  over  from  the  weak  to  the  strong. 
The  details  of  all  these  changes  will  be  given  in  the 
history  of  the  losses  and  gains  of  the  two  conjugations. 

CONFLICT   OF  THE   STRONG  AND   WEAK   CONJUGATIONS. 

114.  In  the  English  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  period  the 
strong  conjugation  was  divided  into  a  number  of  sub- 
ordinate conjugations,  the  distinctions  between  which 
will  be  given  later.  The  diminution  in  the  number  of 
verbs  belonging  to  the  strong  conjugation  —  either  by 
the  loss  to  the  language  of  the  verbs  themselves,  or  by 
their  transition  to  the  weak  conjugation  —  is  the  matter 
of  most  essential  importance,  bringing  to  light,  as  it 
does,  the  origin  of  the  anomalies  that  are  to  be  found 
in  the  existing  inflection  of  the  verb  in  our  tongue. 


The    Verb.  243 

115.  In  the  Anglo-Saxon  there  were  more  than 
three  hundred  simple  verbs  of  the  strong  conjugation  : 
in  Modern  English  there  are  less  than  one  hundred, 
showing  a  diminution  of  more  than  two-thirds.  But 
even  this  gives  no  adequate  conception  of  the  loss. 
As  the  number  of  formative  prefixes  was  far  larger  in 
Anglo-Saxon  than  in  Modern  English,  the  number  of 
compound  verbs  created  by  the  addition  of  these  pre- 
fixes to  the  simple  verb  was  necessarily  much  larger. 
Thus,  in  Anglo-Saxon,  some  ten  new  verbs  were  formed 
by  the  addition  of  ten  different  prefixes  to  standan  :  of 
these  ten.  Modern  English  has  retained  only  with  and 
under;  so  that,  from  this  same  verb,  we  now  form  two 
verbs  only,  withstand  and  understand,  instead  of  the 
original  ten.  The  disproportion  between  the  earlier 
and  the  later  form  of  the  language,  in  respect  to  the 
number  of  strong  verbs,  is  consequently  much  greater 
than  would  be  implied  by  a  loss  of  two-thirds. 

116.  The  causes  of  this  loss  are  not  hard  to  find. 
Even  during  the  Anglo-Saxon  period  all  verbs  derived 
from  nouns  or  other  verbs  were  inflected  according  to 
the  weak  conjugation.  Such  was  the  case  also  with 
the  few  foreign  verbs  that  were  from  time  to  time  intro- 
duced. On  the  other  hand,  the  strong  conjugation 
received  no  accessions.  Under  any  circumstances, 
therefore,  the  number  of  weak  verbs  would  be  con- 
standy  increasing ;  while  the  strong,  by  simply  remain- 
ing the  same,  would  become  a  proportionally  smaller 
fraction  of  the  whole.  It  was  an  inevitable  result  of 
this,  that  the  tendency  would  manifest  itself  at  some 


244  English  Language. 

time  to  inflect  all  verbs  in  the  way  that  the  ma- 
jority of  them  were  inflected ;  and  there  is  evidence 
that  this  was  beginning  to  exert  some  influence  in  the 
language  as  it  is  found  written  before  the  Norman 
conquest.  Many  of  the  strong  verbs  have  weak 
derivative  verbs  with  precisely  the  same  meaning 
alongside  of  them.  In  some  cases  a  weak  derivative 
verb  exists  as  the  representative  of  a  strong  verb  that 
had  gone  out  of  use  in  Anglo-Saxon,  but  has  been 
preserved  in  other  early  Teutonic  languages.  But  a 
special  cause  operated  to  hasten  the  change  in  the 
relative  numbers  of  the  two  conjugations,  and  to 
widen  vastly  the  disproportion  already  beginning  to 
exist.  The  Norman  conquest  made  French  the  lan- 
guage of  the  cultivated  classes,  and  left  the  native 
tongue  to  be  used  exclusively  by  the  more  uneducated 
portion  of  the  community.  Confusion  speedily  sprang 
up  between  the  two  conjugations  in  the  speech  of 
ignorant  men,  and,  in  process  of  time,  became  estab- 
lished by  custom  in  the  speech  of  all.  The  tendency 
to  bring  about  uniformity  at  any  cost  now  began  ta 
make  itself  powerfully  felt  in  causing  the  inflection  of 
verbs  belonging  to  the  smaller  class  to  conform  to  that 
of  the  larger;  just  as,  in  modern  times,  under  the 
influence  of  this  same  tendency,  children  and  unedu- 
cated men  say  drinked  for  drank,  drawed  for  drew^ 
seed  for  saw,  and  knowed  for  knew.  This  was  inevi- 
tably the  source  of  much  loss ;  but,  great  as  it  was,  it 
was  not  to  be  compared  with  the  effects  produced  by 
the  influx  of  foreign  words  from  the  French,  whi^b, 


The    Verb.  24$ 

beginning  toward  the  end  of  the  thirteenth  century, 
culminated  in  revolutionizing  the  vocabulary  in  the 
century  following.  All  the  new  verbs  taken  from  the 
French  were  inflected  according  to  the  weak  conjuga- 
tion; and  with  their  introduction  dropped  out  of  use 
a  large  number  of  Anglo-Saxon  verbs.  Many  of  these 
belonged  to  the  strong  conjugatiqn,  and  their  loss  to 
it  could  never  be  replaced.  The  consequence  was, 
that,  at  the  beginning  of  the  Middle  English  period, 
the  whole  number  of  strong  verbs  in  the  language  had 
become  comparatively  small.  Not  only  was  this  true, 
but  it  seemed  as  if,  under  the  influence  of  the  ten- 
dency to  uniformity,  they  were  about  to  disappear 
altogether. 

117.  The  transition  of  verbs  of  the  strong  conjuga- 
tion to  that  of  the  weak  was  arrested,  however,  as  soon 
as  the  influence  of  literary  models  —  the  great  con- 
servative agency  in  speech  —  began  to  make  itself 
widely  felt.  The  movement  in  this  direction,  which 
had  been  going  on  steadily  since  the  Norman  con- 
quest, received  its  first  check  in  the  latter  half  of  the 
fourteenth  century  with  the  rise  of  a  native  literature 
of  "a  high  order.  The  usage  of  Chaucer,  so  far  as  it 
is  exemplified  in  "The  Canterbury  Tales,"  has  been 
already  pointed  out,  and  contrasted  with  that  of  the 
present  time.^  From  his  age  the  tendency  of  the 
strong  verbs  to  become  weak  became  less  a,nd  less 
conspicuous,  and  at  the  end  of  the  Middle  English 
period  had  ceased  entirely.     Modern  English  has  los! 

I-  See  pp.  iiy,  ff. 


246  English  Language. 

not  a  single  one  since  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth, 
What  the  language  then  had  it  has  ever  since  retained, 
nor  does  it  manifest  the  least  disposition  to  abandon 
any  it  now  has.  True,  there  have  been  periods  in 
which  weak  preterites  and  past  participles,  like  choosed, 
bloived,  chidcd^  corned,  weaved,  and  numerous  others, 
have  been,  to  a  greater  or  less  extent,  in  use,  and  in 
most  periods  have  been  persistently  urged  by  some 
grammarians.  But  their  use  has  never  broadened 
and  perpetuated  itself.  In  fact,  the  present  disposition 
of  the  language  is  not  only  to  hold  firmly  to  the  strong 
verbs  it  already  possesses,  but  to  strengthen  their  hold, 
and  even  to  extend  their  number  whenever  possible. 
Forms  once  comm.on,  and  in  the  best  usage,  such  as 
shaked,  shiiied,  strived,  and  thrived,  are  now  much 
rarer  than  shook,  shone,  strove,  and  th^'cve,  or  else  are 
not  met  with  at  all.  Woke,  though  not  found  in 
Shakspeare,  Milton,  and  the  English  Bible,  has  be- 
come, during  the  last  century,  full  as  common  as 
waked  as  the  preterite  of  wake  ;  while  dug  may  be  said 
to  have  supplanted  digged,  the  regular  preterite,  not 
on^y  of  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries,  but 
of  all  preceding  periods. 

118.  The  history  of  the  English  verb  is,  therefore, 
from  one  point  of  view,  the  history  of  a  conflict  be- 
tween the  weak  and  the  strong  conjugations,  in  which 
the  former  steadily  tended  for  three  centuries  to  become 
the  one  exclusively  in  use.  The  arrest  of  the  develop- 
ment in  this  direction,  which  overtook  the  verb  in  the 
fourteenth  centur}',  was  the   main  cause  that  all  our 


The   Verb.  247 

verbs  are  not  now  inflected  according  to  the  weak 
conjugation.  Still  it  was  inevitable  that  the  stoppage 
of  the  transition  that  had  been  going  on  from  the 
strong  to  the  weak  inflection  should  cause  many  appar- 
ently anomalous  and  irregular  forms  to  appear  in  the 
language ;  and  a  satisfactory  account  of  the  later  his- 
tory of  the  strong  conjugation  has  been  made  a  task 
of  no  slight  difliculty,  in  consequence  of  the  irregu- 
larities that  appe.-^.r  in  many  verbs,  and  the  seemingly 
capricious  changes  that  have  taken  place  in  their 
inflections  at  various  periods. 

iig.  The  first  point  of  importance  to  be  mentioned 
in  the  history  of  the  strong  conjugation  is,  that  more 
than  a  hundred  simple  verbs  originally  belonging  to 
it  have  disappeared  from  the  language  entirely.  Some 
of  these  had  clearly  become  obsolete  in  later  Anglo- 
-Saxon ;  but  of  those  that  were  in  common  use  during 
that  period,  and  have  since  been  dropped,  the  places 
have,  in  the  majority  of  instances,  been  taken  by  verbs 
derived  from  the  Norman  French. 

120.  The  next  point  is,  that  a  hundred  and  eight 
verbs,  which,  in  Anglo-Saxon,  belonged  to  the  strong 
conjugation,  have  passed  over  wholly  or  partially  to 
the  weak.  The  list  embraces  many  of  the  most  com- 
mon words  of  the  language,  and,<in  enumerating  them, 
they  will  be  arranged  according  to  the  classes  of  strong 
*'erbs  as  laid  down  in  sections  142  to  148  inclusive. 
In  some  of  them  there  has  been  only  a.  partial  trans- 
fer. They  have  retained  strong  forms  in  equal  au- 
thority with  the  weak,  or  even  in  greater.    They  hav€ 


248  English  Language. 

retained  strong  forms  in  poetry,  while  dropping  them 
in  prose  ;  or  they  have  retained  simply  either  a  strong 
participial  form,  or  a  strong  preterite  form.  These 
variations  will  be  discussed  later.  In  the  following 
iists  the  verbs  that  still  exhibit  any  of  the  original 
inflections  will  be  denoted  by  Itahcs. 

121.  Of  the  verbs  originally  belonging  to  Class 
I.  of  strong  verbs  (142)  the  following  have  become 
weak :  — 


I.  ban. 

9.  hew. 

17.  sow. 

2.  blend. 

10.  hight. 

18.  span. 

3.  blow  (' 

to  bloom '). 

II.  leap. 

19.  sweep. 

4.  crow. 

12.  let. 

20.  walk. 

5.  dread. 

13.  low. 

21.  weep. 

6.  flow. 

14.  mow. 

22.  well. 

7.  fold. 

15.  row. 

23.  whoop. 

8.  hang. 

16.  sleep. 

24.  wield 

122.  Of  the  verbs  which  originally  belonged  to 
Class  II.  of  the  strong  conjugation  (143),  the  follow- 
ing are  now  inflected,  wholly  or  partially,  according  to 
the  weak :  — 

19.  thresh. 

20.  warp. 

21.  wind. 

22.  yell. 

23.  yelp. 

24.  yield. 

.  To  these  might  be  added  swijik,  '  to  toil,'  which  is 
still  found  at  times  in  poetry,  though  obsolete  in  prose. 

123.  Of  Class  III.  (144)  about  half  of  the  original 
number  survived,  and,  of  these,  a   small   propc^rtion 


I. 

bark. 

7. 

delve. 

13- 

quench. 

2. 

bellow. 

8. 

ding. 

14. 

spurn. 

3- 

braid. 

9- 

help. 

15- 

starve. 

4- 

burn. 

10. 

melt. 

16. 

stint. 

5- 

burst. 

II. 

milk. 

17- 

swallow. 

6. 

carve. 

12. 

mourn. 

18. 

szuell. 

The    Verb.  249 

only  v/ent  over  to  the  weak  conjugation.     They  are 
the  following :  — 

1.  fret  (compound  of  m/).  5.  shear. 

2.  knead.  6.  sneak. 

3.  mete.  7.  weave. 

4.  (be-)  queathe.  8.  wreak. 

124.  Most  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  verbs  belonging  to 
Class  IV.  (146)  have  been  preserved  in  Modern  Eng- 
lish, though  the  large  majority  of  them  have  gone  over 
entirely  or  partially  to  the  weak  conjugation.  The 
following  is  the  hst  of  these  f  — 

1.  ache.  7.  grave.  12.  shape. 

2.  bake.  8.  heave.  13.  shave. 

3.  drag.  9.  lade,  \  14.  step. 

4.  fare.  load.  S  15.  wade. 

5.  flay.  10.  laugh.  16.  wash. 

6.  gnaw.  II.  scathe.  17.  wax. 

Of  these  verbs  lade  and  load  come  directly  from 
the  same  primitive,  as  also  the  strong  verb  draw  is 
derived  from  the  same  word  as  the  weak  verb  drag. 

125.  Of  the  verbs  belonging  to  Class  V.  (147)  the 
following  have  become  weak  wholly  or  partially  :  — 

1.  f/^^z'^  (*  to  adhere ').       6.  sigh.  11.  twit. 

2.  glide.  7.  slip.  12.  writhe,     ) 

3.  gripe.  8.  slit.  wreathe.  ) 

4.  reap,  9.  spew.  13.  wipe. 

5.  shrive.  lO.  streak  ('to  go '),  14.  yawn. 

Here,  again,  writhe  and  wreathe  come  from  the 
same  original,  and  twit  is  a  compound,  and  not  a  simple 
verb  :  it  comes  from  the  Anglo-Saxon  cetuntan  ;  and 
the  simple  verb  witan  lasted  to  the  Middle  English 
period  as  wite^  '  to  blame/  '  to  find  fault  with."' 


250  English  Language, 

126.  But  few  verbs  of  Class  VI.  (148)  preserved 
the  strong  inflection.  Nearly  half  of  the  original 
number  went  over  to  the  weak  conjugation.  They  are 
the  following :  — 


I.  bow. 

9.  float. 

17.  sho'.e. 

2.  brew. 

10.  lie  ('to  deceive'). 

18.  slip. 

3.  brook. 

II.  lock. 

19.  smoke. 

4.  chew. 

12.  lose. 

20.  sprout. 

5.  cleave  (' 

to  split '). 

13.  reek. 

21.  suck. 

6.  creep. 

14.  rive. 

22.  sup. 

7.  dive. 

15.  rue. 

8.  flee. 

16.  seethe. 

127.  Of  the  above-mentioned  verbs  of  all  the  classes, 
many  have,  even  in  Anglo-Saxon,  weak  derivative 
forms  along  with  the  strong  ones ;  so  that,  in  some 
instances,  it  would  be  more  proper  to  say  that  the 
strong  verb  has  been  dropped  entirely,  and  the  weak 
verb,  possessing  the  same  signification,  has  been  re- 
tained, rather  than  that  the  existing  verb  has  passed 
over  from  the  strong  to  the  weak  conjugation.  Thus, 
besides  the  Anglo-Saxon  strong  verb  s?7iedca7i,  'io 
smoke,'  there  is  also  a  weak  derivative  verb,  smncian^ 
^  to  smoke  ; '  and  it  is  from  the  latter  of  these,  rather 
than  the  former,  that  the  Modern  English  verb  may, 
perhaps,  more  justly  be  said  to  come.  The  same  is 
the  case  with  the  strong  verb  blandan,  and  the  weak 
verb  blendan,  derived  from  it.  Both  mean  '  blend  ; ' 
and  our  modern  word  is  as  much  derived  from  the 
weak  verb  as  from  the  strong,  if  the  former  is  not  to  be 
regarded  as  the  real  original.  There  are  about  twenty 
instances   in  which  verbs  in  the  above  lists   can  be 


The   Verb.  25 1 

referred  to  two  Anglo-Saxon  verbs,  one  weak  and  one 
strong,  of  which  two  of  the  most  conspicuous  are 
hang  and  yawn. 

128.  Many  of  the  verbs  mentioned  in  these  lists, 
and  not  Italicized,  can  be  foand,  especially  in  Early 
and  Middle  English,  and  even  in  the  first  century  of 
Modern  English,  exhibiting  strong  forms.  This  is  par- 
ticularly true  of  the  passive  participle,  of  which  the 
adjective  use  cau<=;ed  it  sometimes  to  be  retained  in 
the  speech  when  the  rest  of  the  verb  had  disappeared 
from  the  tongue  entirely,  or  exhibited  only  the  weak 
inflection.  This  past  participle  of  the  strong  conju- 
gation invariably  ended  in  en  in  the  earliest  period 
of  the  language.  When  a  verb  of  this  conjugation 
became  weak,  it  occasionally  left  behind  its  original 
participle,  though  very  rarely  used  save  as  an  adjec- 
tive. Bursten  and  carven  and  molten  and  writhen  or 
wreathen  are  examples  of  strong  past  participles,  which 
remain  as  adjectives  after  the  verbs  to  which  they 
belong  have  passed  over  to  the  weak  conjugation. 
Even  more  marked  are  lorn  and  its  compound  for- 
lorn, originally  the  participles  of  lose  nndfo?'lose.  To 
this  list  may  perhaps  be  added  the  adjective  rotten ^ 
though  the  strong  Anglo-Saxon  verb  from  which  the 
form  comes  has  a  different  meaning.  The  earlier 
literature  furnishes  frequent  instances  of  such  survivals, 
as  baken,  kneaden,  yolden,  zuashefi,  and  others,  which 
lasted  down  to  the  sixteenth  century,  and  occasionally 
even  later. 

129.  Certain   verbs   originally  strong   nave   under- 


252 


Engl  is  J  I  Language. 


gone  a  partial  transfer  to  the  weak  conjugation ;  that 
is  to  say,  while  taking  the  weak  inflection,  they  have 
also  retained  the  strong.  They  have,  in  consequence, 
a  double  set  of  forms.  In  some  cases,  it  may  be  said 
that  the  strong  inflections  are  confined  to  the  language 
of  poetry,  or  to  the  colloquial  speech ;  in  others,  they 
are  used  only  in  certain  styles,  especially  in  the  ar- 
cliaic  ;  while  in  others,  again,  they  are  far  more  com- 
mon than  the  weak  forms.  On  all  these  points,  usage 
is  so  various,  it  differs  so  much  at  different  times,  that 
all  special  statements  are  liable  to  occasional  excep- 
tions. The  following  is  the  list  of  verbs,  originally 
strong,  that  are  now  inflected  throughout  according 
to  both  conjugations  :  — 

Infinitives. 


I.  cleave  ('to  split 


2.  hang, 


3.  help, 


4.  heave, 

5.  seethe, 

6.  shear, 

7.  shine. 


8.  shrive, 


Preterites 

i. 

Past  Participle 

^. 

clove, 

) 

cloven. 

^ 

cleft  or 

cleft  or 

V 

cleaved, 

) 

cleaved. 

; 

hung, 

1 

hung. 

} 

hanged, 

)  . 

hanged. 

helped, 
holp, 

\ 

helped, 
holp  or 
holpen. 

\ 

heaved, 

heaved. 

\ 

hove, 

hove. 

seethed. 

seethed. 

\ 

sod, 

sodden. 

sheared, 

sheared 

shore, 

shorn. 

) 

shined. 

shined. 

\ 

shone. 

shone. 

shrived, 

shrived. 

shrove, 

shriven. 

The   Verb. 


25:^ 


Infinitives. 
9.  thrive, 
10.  weave, 


Preterites, 

thrived, 

throve, 

weaved, 

wove, 

winded, 

wound, 


Past  Participles, 
thrived, 
thriven, 
weaved. 
woven, 
winded, 
wound. 


II.  wind. 

For  stave  and  strive,  see  sects.  135,  137. 

In  reference  to  the  verbs  included  in  this  list,  it  is 
to  be  added  that  hang  derives  its  weak  inflection  from 
the  Anglo-Saxon  weak  verb  hangian,  hangode ;  and 
that  wind  as  an  original  strong  verb  means  stricdy 
*  to  turn  about  something  fixed ; '  and  that,  in  the  sense 
of  'to  sound  by  blowing,'  it  is  derived  from  the  noun 
wind,  and  etymologically  should  have  a  weak  preterite 
winded.  But  the  two  inflections  have  become  inex- 
tricably involved,  and  are  used  of  the  word  in  both  its 
significations,  with  a  decided  preference  in  each  for 
the  strong. 

130.  But,  in  addition  to  these,  there  are  certain 
verbs  originally  strong  which  have  adopted  in  the 
passive  participle  the  weak  form,  but  have  preterites 
belonging  to  both  conjugations.  Of  these  there  are 
the  following  four  :  — 


Infinitives. 

Preterites. 

Past  Participles. 

I. 

cleave  {' 

to  adhere '), 

cleaved,  ) 
clave,       S 

cleaved. 

2. 

climb, 

climbed,  \ 
clomb,     ) 

climbed. 

3- 

crow, 

crowed,    ) 
crew,        S 

crowed. 

4- 

wake, 

waked,     ) 
woke,      ) 

waked. 

254  English  Language. 

In  regard  to  these  it  is  to  be  remarked  that  clomh 
and  clave  belong  to  the  language  of  poetry  rather  than 
that  of  prose  ;  and  also  that  the  forms  of  cleave,  mean- 
ing 'adhere,'  and  cleave,  vneoLning  'split/  have  been 
and  still  are  frequently  confounded.  The  preterite 
li'olee,  after  ahuost  disappearing  for  several  centuries 
from  the  language  of  hterature,  —  so  much  so  that  it 
is  not  even  recognized  in  our  dictionaries,  —  has, 
during  the  present  century,  become  full  as  common  as 
the  weak  form  waked,  and,  indeed,  has  occasionally 
made  its  way  into  the  passive  participle  ;  and  it  might 
perhaps  be  more  proper  to  add  both  wake  and  cU7nb 
to  the  list  of  those  verbs  that  have  strong  and  weak 
forms  throughout. 

131.  It  is  the  preterite  that  strictly  decides  whethei 
a  particular  word  belongs  to  the  strong  or  the  weak 
conjugation ;  but  it  is  a  striking  fact  that  the  strong 
passive  participle  has  been  retained  in  many  cases 
where  the  strong  preterite  has  been  abandoned.  There 
are  some  nine  verbs  originally  inflected  strong,  but  now 
weak,  that  still  cling  also  to  their  ancient  participial 
form.     The  following  is  the  list :  — 

J  graved,    ) 

1.  grave,  graved,  °  \ 

graven.    ) 

2.  hew,  hewed,  ,  '    \ 

hewn.      ) 

3.  lade, 

4.  mow, 

5.  rive, 


graved, 
hewed, 

graved, 
graven, 
hewed, 
hewn. 

laded. 

laded, 
laden. 

mowed, 

mowed, 
mown. 

rived, 

rived, 
riven. 

The   Verb.  255 

6.  shape,                 shaped,  '  ^ 

7.  shave,                 shaved,  ,          '  \ 
'  shaven.  ) 


8.  sow,  sowed. 


sowed, 
sown. 


,,    ,  swelled,  ) 

9.  swell,  swelled,  ,,        ( 

^  swollen.  ) 

To  these  may  perhaps  be  properly  added  gnaw  and 
wax,  which  occasionally  exhibit  the  strong  participial 
forms  gnawn  and  waxen.  For  the  forms  hidden, 
loaden.,  sawn,  shotvn,  sti'07vn,  and  proven.,  see   sects. 

134,  138,  139- 

132.  These  complete  the  hst  of  existing  verbs  in 
the  language  that  were,  in  Anglo-Saxon,  inflected 
according  to  the  strong  conjugation,  but  are  now 
inflected  wholly  or  partly  according  to  the  weak.  It 
is  to  be  added,  however,  that  the  forms  here  given  are 
the  ones  found  more  or  less  in  present  usage.  If  we 
go  back  to  that  of  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth 
centuries,  we  shall  find  a  number  of  strong  verbs, 
which  in  the  language  of  certain  writers,  if  not  of  all, 
have  weak  inflections  that  are  not  mentioned  here. 
Forms,  indeed,  such  as  shaked,  chided,  wringed,freezed, 
corned,  and  several  others,  are  to  be  met  in  some 
or  in  all  periods  of  Modern  English,  just  as,  in  the 
fourteenth  century,  g?'owed  was  constantly  used  along 
with  grew,  by  the  best  writers,  and,  indeed,  seemed  to 
be  preferred. 

133.  It  is  evident  from  the  above  that  the  Enghsh 
strong  conjugation  has  steadily  lost,  from  the  Norman 


256  English  Language. 

conquest  up  to  the  sixteenth  century,  in  the  number 
of  verbs  belonging  to  it.  Still  there  have  been  some 
compensating  gains.  The  general  rule  has  been  given, 
that  all  verbs  derived  from  nouns  or  from  other  verbs, 
and  all  verbs  taken  from  foreign  tongues,  are  inflected 
according  to  the  weak  conjugation.  But  to  this  cer- 
tain words  are  exceptions,  and  each  of  them  has  a 
separate  history  of  its  own. 

134.  The  following  are  the  verbs  which  were  origi- 
nally inflected  weak,  but  have,  at  a  later  period,  passed 
over  to  the  strong  conjugation  :  — 

1.  Dig  is  a  word  of  somewhat  uncertain  origin, 
though  the  derivation  from  A.  S.  dician,  dicode,  *  to 
make  a  dike,  mound,  or  ditch,'  seems  much  the  most 
reasonable.  In  the  form  in  which  it  now  appears  it 
does  not  seem  to  have  been  used  before  the  fourteenth 
century.  It  had  then,  and  for  several  centuries  follow- 
ing, the  weak  preterite  and  past  participle  digged.  The 
strong  form,  dug,  apparently  did  not  become  common, 
if,  indeed,  it  was  known  at  all,  until  the  eighteenth 
century. 

2.  The  verb  spit,  as  early  certainly  as  the  Middle 
English  period,  developed  a  strong  inflection  —  spit, 
spat,  spitten  —  alongside  of  the  weak  one ;  but  the 
former  never  seems  to  have  been  as  common  at  any 
time  as  the  latter,  though  it  is  found  occasionally  at  all 
times  since  its  origin.  The  verb  comes  directly  from 
the  Anglo-Saxon  weak  verb  spittan,  spitte ;  and  the 
strong  forms  are  unknown  till  much  later.  It  is  not 
impossible  that  the  analogy  of  verbs  like  j/V,  as  origi- 


The   Verb.  257 

nally  inflected,  sit^  sat,  sitten,  may  have  had  some 
influence  in  causing  a  transition,  unless,  in  aU  such 
cases,  we  assume  that  a  strong  verb  was  in  use  in  the 
original  colloquial  speech,  but  did  not  find  its  way 
into  literature. 

3  Stick  is  derived  directly  from  the  weak  Anglo- 
Saxon  verb  stician,  sticode,  having  precisely  the  same 
meaning.  The  forms  stiked  for  the  preterite  and  past 
participle  are  common  in  the  literary  language  of  the 
fourteenth  century ;  but,  in  the  sixteenth,  stuck  had 
taken  its  place  as  the  regular  form.  There  was  an 
Early  English  strong  verb,  stiken,  stek,  or  stak ;  but 
to  this  the  transition  does  not  seem  to  have  been  due. 

4.  Wear  is  derived  directly  from  the  Anglo-Saxon 
weak  verb  werian,  werede.  In  the  literary  language 
of  the  fourteenth  century  werede  and  wered  are  the 
terms  of  the  preterite  and  passive  participle ;  but,  by 
the  end  of  the  Middle  English  period,  the  preterite 
ivare  or  wore  came  in,  and  the  participle  worn. 
There  is  not  much  doubt  that  the  transition  to  the 
strong  conjugation  was  brought  about  by  the  influence 
of  the  strong  inflection,  as  seen  in  such  words  as  bear, 
tear,  and  swear,  closely  related  in  sound. 

5.  To  this  list  the  word  hide  may  be  added,  though 
it  is  still  generally  reckoned  among  the  verbs  of  the 
weak  conjugation  which  have  suffered  contraction  in 
the  preterite  and  passive  participle.  In  the  Middle 
English  period,  however,  en,  the  characteristic  termi' 
nation  of  the  strong  past  participle,  was  added  to  the 
weak  past  participle  hid ;  and  from  that  time  hidden 


258  English  Language. 

and  hid  have  both  been  in  estabhshed  use.  It  seems 
better,  therefore,  to  regard  this  inflection  hide,  hid^ 
hidden  or  hid,  as  now  one  of  the  strong  conjugation, 
Hke  chide,  chid,  chidden  or  chid,  and  slide,  slid,  slidden 
or  slid,  than  as  an  irregular  verb  of  the  weak  con- 
jugation. 

135.  These  are  the  only  verbs,  originally  weak,  that 
have  passed  over  entirely  to  the  strong  conjugation. 
Besides  these  there  are  the  two  following,  which  are 
derived  from  nouns  that  have,  in  the  later  periods  of 
the  language,  received  the  strong  inflection  :  — 

1.  String  is  a  verb  that  has  apparently  been  formed 
from  the  Anglo-Saxon  noun  sti'ing  or  siirnge,  '  string. 
It  is  certainly  not  common  before  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, though  it  would  be  venturesome  to  assert  that  it 
had  not  a  much  earlier  existence.  Though  the  parti- 
cipial adjective  stringed  has  been  much  in  use,  it  is 
most  likely  that  the  verb,  from  the  beginning  of  its 
formation,  was  inflected  string,  strung,  strung,  accord- 
ing to  the  strong  conjugation,  after  the  analogy  of 
swing,  swung;  sing,  sung ;  and  numerous  others. 

2.  The  verb  stave  seems  to  be,  like  string,  a  modern 
formation,  and  is  formed  directly  from  the  substantive 
stave  or  staff.  It  has  both  a  weak  and  a  strong  pret- 
eiite,  staved  and  stove,  and  corresponding  passive 
participles.  The  weak  forms  are  far  more  common, 
however,  before  the  present  century. 

■  136.  The  two  following,  of  somewhat  uncertain 
derivation,  are  also  inflected  strong.  Neither  of  them 
is  known  to  the  earliest  period  of  the  language. 


The   Verb.  259 

1.  The  first  is  fling,  which,  perhaps,  came  to  our 
tongue  from  the  Norse.  It  is  first  found  in  the  Early 
EngHsh  period,  and  has  never  been  inflected  otherwise 
than  according  to  the  strong  conjugation. 

2.  The  second  is  the  technical  naval  verb  reeve, 
7'ove,  rove.  Its  derivation  is  uncertain,  and  it  proba- 
bly belongs  exclusively  to  Modern  English. 

137.  One  Romance  word  has  also  passed  over  par- 
tially to  the  strong  conjugation  :  this  is  the  verb  strive, 
taken  directly  from  the  old  French  estriver,  which  is 
itself,  however,  derived  from  a  Teutonic  noun.  From 
its  very  entrance  into  the  language  it  was  inflected 
according  to  both  conjugations,  the  strong  inflection 
having,  doubtless,  been  assumed  by  it  after  the  analogy 
of  di'ive,  drove,  driven ;  thrive,  throve,  thriven :  and 
from  the  fourteenth  century  to  the  present  time  the 
strong  and  weak  preterites  strove  and  strived  can  be 
found  side  by  side,  as  likewise  the  passive  participles 
striven  and  strived.  The  language  at  present  prefers 
the  strong  forms. 

138.  Three  weak  verbs  showed  a  tendency  to  pass 
over  to  the  strong  conjugation,  and,  in  the  case  of 
each,  a  strong  passive  participle  has  been  added  to 
their  inflection.     They  are  the  following  :  — 


I.  show, 

showed, 

2.  strew, 

strewed, 

3.  saw. 

sawed, 

;M 


showed, 
shown, 
strewed, 
strewn, 
sawed,     ^ 
sawn.       S 


26o  English  Language. 

The  first  of  these  is  derived  from  the  Anglo-Saxon 
weak  verb  sceawian,  sceawode :  the  second,  which  is 
often  written  and  oftener  pronounced  as  straw,  is  from 
the  Anglo-Saxon  weak  verb  siredwia7i,  sti-edwode.  It 
was  in  the  Middle  English  period  that  the  strong  parti- 
cipial forms  of  these  two  words  came  into  use  along- 
side of  the  weak  ones ;  and,  as  in  like  instances,  the 
analogy  of  verbs  like  know,  blow,  grow,  and  others, 
had  the  most  powerful  influence  in  their  production 
and  wide  employment.  But  the  strong  forms  never 
extended  beyond  the  past  participle,  though  the  strong 
preterite  shew  for  showed  early  established  itself  in  the 
provincial  dialects,  and  has  never  died  out.  Saw,  as 
a  verb,  does  not  apparently  go  back  to  an  early  period. 
It  was  doubtless  derived  from  the  noun  spelled  in  the 
same  way,  and  its  strong  past  participle  seems  to  have 
been  'developed  first  in  Modern  English.  To  this  list 
might  justly  also  be  added  the  verb  load,  which  still 
has  at  times  a  passive  participle  loaden,  though  this  is 
far  from  being  as  common  as  laden.  But  lade  and 
load  are  both  derived  from  the  same  Anglo-Saxon 
strong  verb.  ^-^^  - 

--'  139.  The  addition  of  the  strong  participial  ending 
en  to  verbs  originally  weak  has  met  with  success  in  the 
case  of  hidden,  shown,  strewn,  and  sawn.  It  is 
probable,  though  it  has  never  been  proved,  that  some, 
if  not  all,  of  these  forms  came  originally  into  the 
literary  language  from  the  Northern  dialect.  When, 
two  or  three  centuries  after  the  Norman  conquest,  that 
dialect  re-appears  once  more  in  literature,  one  of  its 


The   Verb.  261 

special  characteristics  is  its  inclination  to  retain  the  full 
form  en  of  the  strong  passive  participle ;  while,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  dialect  of  the  South  was  early  dis- 
posed to  drop  the  n.  The  modern  participle  sung,  in 
consequence,  would  be  in  the  thirteenth  century  in 
the  one  speech  stingen,  in  the  other  sunge,  or  y-sunge. 
But  not  only  did  the  Northern  dialect  so  prefer  the 
termination  en  as  to  retain  it  in  the  cases  where  it 
strictly  belonged,  it  also  manifested  the  disposition  to 
add  it  to  words  to  which  it  did  not  properly  belong. 
Certain  weak  verbs,  such  as  cast,  cut,  puty  thrust^ 
mainly  of  Scandinavian  origin,  added  to  the  weak  pas- 
sive participle,  which  by  contraction  had  become  the 
same  as  the  infinitive,  as  in  Modern  EngUsh,  the  end- 
ing en,  giving  us  such  forms  as  casten,  cutien,  ptctten, 
thrusten  or  throssen  ;  and  precisely  of  a  similar  forma- 
tion is  the  verbal  adjective  boughtcfi,  not  infrequent  in 
America.  It  cannot  be  said  that  such  forms  as  these 
have  ever  made  their  way  to  any  extent  beyond  the 
dialects  in  which  they  originated ;  but  scattered 
through  the  whole  of  Modern  English  literature  are 
occasional  instances  of  the  substitution  of  a  strong 
participial  termination  for  that  of  a  weak  one  ;  as,  for 
instance,  paven  as  used  by  Milton  (Comus,  hne  ZZG), 
One  marked  form  is,  however,  here  to  be  noticed  :  this 
is  the  past  participle  proven  for  proved.  The  word  is 
derived  from  the  French,  and  in  literary  use  has  been 
inflected,  until  the  present  century,  like  all  other  for- 
eign verbs,  according  to  the  weak  conjugation  through- 
out. _  But  the  strong  participial  form  proven  has  made 


262  English  Language. 

its  way  from  the  Scottish  sub-dialect  of  the  Northern 
dialect  into  the  language  of  literature,  and  not  only  has 
grown  common,  but  promises  to  become  universal ; 
for  it  is  widely  employed  by  many  of  the  best  modem 
writers,  and,  in  particular,  occurs  frequently  in  the  later 
poems  of  Tennyson. 

The   English    Strong   Conjugation. 

140.  The  variations  and  modifications  that  took 
place  within  the  strong  conjugation  naturally  involve 
the  discussion  of  its  preterites  and  past  participles,  not 
as  distinguished  from  those  of  the  weak  conjugation, 
but  as  distinguished  from  each  other.  It  therefore 
becomes  necessary  to  introduce  at  this  point  much  in 
regard  to  those  parts  of  the  verbs  which  strictly  would 
find  place  elsewhere  ;  for,  in  the  history  of  the  strong 
conjugation,  numerous  anomalies  have  arisen  in  con- 
sequence of  the  confusing  of  preterite  and  participial 
forms. 

141.  The  Anglo-Saxon  strong  verbs  may  be  divided 
into  six  classes,^  the  origin  of  the  distinctions  between 

*  For  convenience  of  reference,  and  of  comparison  with  other  works,  the 
following  statement  is  made  in  reference  to  the  classes  as  here  given:  Class  I. 
coiresponds  to  the  first  five  strong  conjugations  in  Grimm's  system  of  the 
Teutonic  strong  conjugation;  Class  II.,  to  Grimm's  twelfth  conjugation;  Class 
III.,  to  his  tenth  and  eleventh  conjugations;  Class  IV.,  to  his  seventh  conjuga- 
tion; Class  v.,  to  his  eighth  conjugation;  and  Class  VI.,  to  his  ninth.  Fur- 
ther, Class  I.,  as  here  given,  includes  all  the  verbs  that  in  Anglo-Saxon 
showed  traces  of  primitive  reduplication;  the  other  classes,  those  that  ex- 
hibit vowel-change  proper.  To  Class  II.  belong  all  verbs  that  have  the  radi- 
cal vowel  a  before  a  double  consonant;  to  Class  III.,  all  that  have  the  radical 
vowel  a  before  a  single  consonant;  to  Class  IV.,  all  that  have  the  radical 
vowel  a  usually  before  a  single  consonant,  lengthened  into  o  in  the  preterite; 
to  Class  v.,  all  that  have  i  as  the  radical  vowel;  and  to  Class  VI.,  all  that 
have  «  as  the  radical  vowel. 


The   Verb. 


263 


which  it  is  not  necessary  to  enter  into  here.  Under 
each  of  these  classes  will  be  given  those  verbs  origi- 
nally belonging  to  it,  which  have  been  preserved  with 
their  strong  inflections  in  Modern  English.  The  prin- 
cipal parts  given  are,  i,  the  infinitive;  2  and  3  the 
preterite  singular  (excluding  the  second  person)  and 
the  preterite  plural;  4,  the  passive  participle.  Mod- 
ern English  forms  are  placed  under  the  corresponding 
Anglo-Saxon ;  and,  when  one  of  the  former  has  not 
been  directly  derived  from  the  one  under  which  it 
falls,  the  fact  is  marked  by  enclosing  the  modern  word 
in  parentheses. 

142.  Class  I.  —  To  this  in  Anglo-Saxon  belonged 
about  fifty  verbs.  The  vowel  of  both  numbers  of  the 
preterite  was  either  e  or  ed.  Of  these  verbs  nine  re- 
main to  Modern  English,  and  the  preterite  has  e  as  its 
vowel,  in  one  case  ea. 


I. 

beat, 

beatan ; 
beat 

beot, 
beat 

beoton ; 

beaten. 
beaten 

2, 

blow, 

blawan ; 
blow 

bleow, 

blew 

bleowon ; 

blawen. 
blown 

3- 

crow, 

era  wan ; 

creow, 

creowon ; 

crawen. 

crow 

crew 

{crowed) 

4- 

fall, 

feallan ; 
fall 

feoll, 

feollon ; 

feallen. 
fallen 

5- 
6. 

grow, 
hang  (IL), 

growan ; 
grow 
hangan ;  ) 
hon ;        ( 

hang 

greow, 

grew 
heng, 
(Jiung) 

greowon ; 
hengon ; 

growen. 

grown 

hangen. 
{hung) 

7- 
8 

hole!, 
know, 

healdan ; 

hold 
cnawan ; 

know 

heold, 
held 
cneow, 

knew 

heoldon ; 
cneowon ; 

healden. 

{held)  holderu 

cnawen. 

known 

9- 

throw, 

prawan ; 
throw 

Jjreow, 
threw 

preowon ; 

prawen. 
thrown 

264 


Efiglish  Language, 


Of  this  class  it  will  be  noticed,  that,  in  Modem 
English,  hang  has  passed  from  it  to  Class  II.  and  it, 
in  turn,  has  gained  draw  and  slay  from  Class  IV.,  and 
fly  from  Class  VI. 

143.  Class  II.  —  Of  this  class  there  were  some 
eighty  verbs  in  Anglo-Saxon.  The  vowel  of  the  pret- 
erite singular  was  a  or  ea,  in  a  few  cases  ce ;  that  of 
the  plural,  invariably  u.  The  Modern  English  preterite, 
when  derived  from  the  singular,  has  invariably  a  ;  when 
from  the  plural,  it  or  ou ;  in  two  cases  it  has  o. 
Twenty-three  of  the  original  verbs  survive  :  — 


I.  bind, 

bindan ; 

band, 

bundon ; 

bunden. 

bind 

bound 

bound  ^ 

2.  climb, 

climban ; 

clamb, 

clumbon ; 

clumben. 

clijiib 

clomb 

clomb  ? 

3.  cling, 

clingan ; 

clang. 

clungon ; 

clungen. 

cling 

clung 

clung 

4.  drink, 

drincan ; 

dranc, 

druncon ; 

druncen. 

dritik 

drank 

d7'unk 

drimk 

5-  fight, 

feohtan ; 

feaht. 

fuhton  ; 

fohten. 

fight 

fioughi 

fioughi 

6.  find, 

findan ; 

fand, 

f undon ; 

funden. 

find 

fotind 

fiound 

7-  -gin, 

-ginnan ; 

-gan, 

-gunnon  ; 

-gunnen. 

-gin 

-gan. 

-gun 

-gun 

8.  grind, 

grindan ; 

grand. 

grundon ; 

grunden. 

grind 

grotcnd 

ground 

9.  ring, 

ringan ; 

rang, 

rungon ; 

rungen. 

ring 

rang 

rung 

rung 

10.  run, 

rinnan ; 

ran, 

runnon ; 

runnen. 

{run) 

ran 

rufi 

II.  shrink, 

scrincan ; 

scranc, 

scruncon ; 

scrunce.n. 

shrink 

shrank 

shrunk 

shrunk 

12.  sing, 

singan : 

sang, 

sungon  ; 

sungen. 

sing 

sang 

stmg 

sung 

The   Verb 

26 

13-  slingan, 

slingan ; 

slang. 

slungon ; 

slungen. 

sling 

slung 

slung 

14.  slink, 

slincan ; 

slanc. 

sluncon ; 

sluncen. 

slink 

shmk 

slunk 

15.  spin, 

spinnan  ; 

span, 

spunnon ; 

spunnen. 

spin 

spun 

spiut. 

16.  spring, 

springan ; 

sprang, 

sprungon ; 

sprungen. 

spring 

sprang 

sprung 

sprung 

17.  sting. 

stingan; 

stang, 

stungon ; 

stungen. 

sting 

stung 

stung 

18.  stink. 

stincan  ; 

stanc, 

stuncon ; 

stuncen. 

stink 

stank 

stunk 

stunk 

19.  swim, 

swimman ; 

swam, 

swummon ; 

;   swummen. 

swim 

swam 

stvum 

swum 

20.  swing. 

swingan ; 

swang. 

swungon  ; 

swungen. 

swing 

swung 

swung 

21.  win, 

winnan ; 

wan. 

wunnon ; 

wunnen. 

win 

%oon 

won 

22.  wind, 

windan ; 

wand, 

wundon ; 

wunden. 

wind 

wound 

wound 

23.  wring. 

wringan  ; 

wrang. 

wrungon ; 

wrungea 

wring 

wrung 

wrung 

Of  these  verbs,  cltngan,  in  Anglo-Saxon,  does  not 
have  its  modern  meaning,  but  signifies  'to  wither.' 
To  this  class  have  been  added  hang,  fi-om  Class  I.,  and 
strike,  from  Class  V.  In  literary  English,  hang  had  for 
its  preterite  he7ig,  the  representative  of  the  original 
form,  until  the  fifteenth  century,  and  perhaps  later; 
but  in  the  sixteenth  this  had  usually  given  way  to  htmg, 

144.  Class  III. — To  this  belonged,  in  Anglo-Saxon, 
about  forty  verbs.  These  had,  as  the  vowel  of  the 
preterite  singular  cb,  ea,  or  a,  and,  correspondingly  in 
the  plural,  k,  ea,  or  a.  Sixteen  of  these  verbs  are  still 
found  in  Modem  English  :  — 


266 


English  Language, 


1.  bear, 

2.  bid, 

3.  break, 

4.  come, 

5.  eat 

6.  get, 

7.  give, 

8.  lie, 

9.  see, 

10.  shear, 

11.  sit, 

12.  speak, 

13.  steal, 

14.  tear, 

15.  tread, 

16.  weave, 


beran ; 

bear 
biddan ; 

bid 


baer,      bdbron ; 

{bore) 
baed,      bsbdon ; 
bade       {bid) 


brecan ; 

braec,    brscon ; 

break 

{broke) 

cuman  ; 

cam,      camon ; 

come 

came 

etan; 

ast,         ffiton ; 

eat 

ate 

getan ; 

geat,      geaton ; 

get 

{got) 

gifan ; 

geaf,      geafon ; 

give 

gave 

licgan ;    • 

laeg,       leegon ; 

he 

lay 

seohan ;  ) 
seon;     f 

seah,     sawon ; 

see 

J-<77£/ 

sceran ; 

scaer,     scseron ; 

shear 

{shore) 

sittan ; 
sit 

specan ; 

speak 
stelan  ; 

steal 
teran  ; 

tear 
tredan ; 

tread 
wef  an ; 

weave 


saet,       sffiton ; 
sat 

spasc,     spfficon ; 

{spoke) 
stael,      stolon ; 

{stole) 
taer,       t^ron ; 

{tore) 
traed,     trsedon ; 

{trod) 
■waef,      w^f  on ; 

{^ove) 


boren. 

born{e) 
beden. 

{bidden) 
brecen,  I 
brocen.  ) 

broken 
cumen. 

cojue 
eten. 

eaten,  eat 
geten. 

{gotteii.got) 
gifen. 

given 
legen. 

lain 

segen,   \ 
sen.       J 

seen 
scoren. 

shorn 
seten. 

{sat) 

specen, ) 
spocen.  ) 

spoken 
stolen. 

stolen 
toren. 

torn 
treden. 

{trodden"^ 
wef  en. 

{zvoven) 


145.  To  this  class  belongs  the  defective  verb  quoth, 
found  only  in  the  preterite  in  Modern  English.  In 
Anglo-Saxon  the  principal  parts  were  as  follows  :  — 

cwetSan,        cwaetS,     cwsbdon,        cweden. 


The    Verb. 


267 


By  the  fourteenth  century  it  was  rare  that  any  other 
part  of  this  verb  beside  the  preterite  was  used ;  but 
the  preterite  itself  was  then  very  common.  It  ap- 
peared indifferently  with  the  consonant  of  the  singular 
or  of  the  plural,  as  quoth  or  quod ;  but  the  former  be- 
came the  prevalent  form  before  the  end  of  the  Middle 
English  period.  The  compound  be-queathe  (123) 
has  retained  the  full  verbal  inflection,  but  has  passed 
entirely  over  to  the  weak  conjugation. 

146.  Class  IV.  —  In  this  class  there  were  in  Anglo- 
Saxon  nearly  thirty  verbs.  The  vowel  for  both  num- 
bers of  the  preterite  was  0 ;  in  Modem  Enghsh  it  is 
00  or  o.  Nine  of  these  verbs  still  remain  in  our  lan- 
guage with  the  strong  inflection  :  — 


'• 

draw  (I.), 

dragan  ; 
draw 

drog,     drogon ; 
[drew) 

dragen. 
drawn 

•7, 

heave, 

hebban ; 
heave 

hof,       hofon ; 
hove 

hafen. 
{hove) 

3- 

(for)sake, 

sacan ; 

-sake 

soc,       socon ; 
-sook 

sacen. 
-saken 

4- 

shake, 

scacan ; 
shake 

scoc,      scocon ; 
shook 

scacen. 
shaken 

5- 
6. 

slay  (I.), 
stand, 

slahan ; 

slean; 

slay 
standan ; 

stand 

sloh,     slogon ; 
{sleu>) 

stod,     stodon ; 
stood 

slagen. 
slain 

standen. 
{stood) 

7- 

swear, 

swerian ; 

swor,     sworon ; 

sworen. 

swear 

swore 

sworn 

8. 

take. 

tacan ; 

take 

toe,        tocon ; 
took 

tacen. 
taken 

9. 

wake, 

wacan ; 
•   wake 

woe,      wocon ; 
woke 

wacen. 
{woke  ?) 

Of  these  verbs  draw  and 
lish,  passed  over  to  Class  I 


slay  have,  in  Modern  Eng« 
.,  in  the  preterite. 


268 


English  Language. 


147.  Class  V.  —  This  class  numbered  over  fifty 
verbs  in  Anglo-Saxon.  The  preterite  singular  had  for 
its  vowel  a  ;  the  plural  had  /.  In  Modem  English  the 
vowels  of  the  preterite  are  a^  o,  and  i.  Fifteen  of 
these  verbs  survive  :  — 


I. 

{a)bide, 

bidan ; 

bad,      bidon ; 

biden. 

-bide 

bode 

{-bided) 

2. 

bite, 

bitan ; 

bat,      biton ; 

biten. 

bite 

bit 

bitten 

3- 

chide, 

cidan ; 

cad,      cidon ; 

ciden. 

chide 

chid 

chidden 

4- 

cleave  ('  to  adhere '] 

1,  clifan ; 

claf,      clifon ; 

clifen. 

cleave 

clave 

{cleaved) 

V 

drive, 

drif  an ; 

draf,     drifon ; 

drifen. 

drive 

drove 

driven 

6. 

ride, 

ridan ; 

rad,      ridon ; 

riden. 

ride 

rode      rid 

ridden 

7- 

r'se. 

risan ; 

ras,       rison ; 

risen. 

rise 

rose 

risen 

8. 

shine. 

scinan ; 

scin,    scinon ; 

scinen. 

shine 

shone 

{shone) 

9- 

shrive, 

scrifan  ; 

scraf,    scrifon ; 

scrifen. 

shrive 

shTOve 

shriven 

10. 

slide, 

slidan ; 

slad,     slidon ; 

sliden. 

slide 

slid 

sliddcn 

II. 

smite, 

smitan ; 

smat,    smiton ; 

smiten. 

smite 

smote 

smitten 

12. 

stride. 

stridan ; 

strad,   stridon; 

striden. 

stride 

strode 

stridden 

13- 

strike  (IL), 

strican ; 

strac,    stricon ; 

stricen. 

strike 

{struck) 

stricken 

14. 

thrive. 

Jjrifan  ; 

f  raf,     prifon ; 

l^rifen. 

thrive 

throve 

thriven 

15- 

write, 

writan  ; 

wrat,     writon ; 

writen. 

write 

wrote    writ 

written 

Of  these  verbs,  strican,  in  Anglo-Saxon,  meant  'to 
go  rapidly ; '  and  the  modern  meaning  of  the  verb  did 


The   Verb. 


269 


not  belong  to  it.  It  has  also  passed  over  to  Class  II., 
in  Modern  English,  in  the  preterite,  though  it  retains 
sometimes  its  regular  past  participle,  stricken. 

148.  Class  VI.  —  To  this  class  belonged,  in  Anglo- 
Saxon,  about  fifty  verbs.  The  preterite  in  the  singu- 
lar had  for  its  vowel  ed  ;  for  the  plural,  u.  In  Modem 
English  the  vowel  of  the  preterite  is  0  or  00. 


I.  choose, 

ceosan ; 

ceas,'       curon ; 

coren. 

choose 

chose 

cho{s)en 

2.  cleave  (' 

to  split '), 

cleofan ; 

cleaf,       clufon ; 

clofen. 

cleave 

clove 

cloven 

Z'fiy^ 

fleogan ; 

fleah,       flugon ; 

flogen. 

fly 

{flew) 

flozan 

4.  freeze, 

freosan ; 

freas,       fruron ; 

froren. 

freeze 

froze 

fro{z)en 

5.  seethe, 

seotsan ; 

sea3,        sudon ; 

soden. 

seethe 

sod 

sodden 

6.  shoot, 

sceotan ; 

sceat,      scuton ; 

scoten. 

shoot 

shot 

shot 

Of  these  words,  fly^  flew,  has  gone  over  to  the  first 
class  in  Modern  English,  its  forms  apparently  having 
been  confounded  with  the  preterite  and  past  participle 
oi  flow  an, '  to  flow.'  Shoot  may  also  be  regarded  as  a 
contract  verb  of  the  weak  conjugation,  the  old  strong 
participle  shotten,  having  gone  out  of  use. 

149.  The  above  lists  embrace  seventy-seven  verbs. 
They  are  all  which  are  now  in  use  that  can  trace  their 
origin  to  a  known  Anglo-Saxon  strong  verb ;  and  some 
of  them,  as  has  already  been  shown,  have  developed 
weak  forms  along  with  the  strong  ones.  But,  in  addi- 
tion to  these,  ten  other  verbs  have  been  pointed  out 
as  now  having  the  strong  inflection,  v/hich  were  either 


2/0  English  Language. 

not  known  to  the  Anglo-Saxon  at  all,  or  were  known 
only  as  weak  verbs.  It  is  no  easy  matter  to  state  defi- 
nitely the  time  of  their  introduction  into  the  language, 
or  of  their  transition  from  the  weak  to  the  strong  con- 
jugation ;  and  all  assertions  are  liable  to  be  proved 
mistaken  as  the  earlier  literature  is  more  closely 
studied.  But,  apparently,  it  may  be  said  with  a  fair 
degree  of  certainty,  that  fli77g,  stick,  and  stiive  belong 
to  the  Early  English  period ;  hide,  spit,  and  wear,  to 
the  Middle  English ;  and  dig,  stave,  string,  and  the 
technical  sea-term  reeve,  belong  to  Modern  English. 
Within  the  strong  conjugation,  they  may  be  assigned 
to  the  following  classes  :  — 

II.  III.  V. 

dig.  wear.  hide, 

fling.  spit.  reeve, 

stick.  stave, 

string.  strive. 

150.  The  strong  verbs  now  existing  in  the  language 
consequently  number  eighty-seven.  Necessarily,  this 
assertion  is  made  of  the  simple  verbs  only,  and  does 
not  refer  to  their  compounds,  which  follow  the  conju- 
gation of  the  simple  verb.  These  compounds,  how- 
ever, are  few  in  number ;  as  compared  with  the  earliest 
period  of  the  speech,  the  loss  in  them  has  been  enor- 
mous. The  word  fret,  it  is  to  be  added,  is  inflected 
weak ;  though  the  simple  verb  eat,  of  which  it  is  a 
compound,  belongs  to  the  strong  conjugation  :  and 
forsake  is  a  single  instance  also  of  the  preservation  of 
a  compound  while  the  simple  verb  sake  has  perished. 


Tke   Vert.  ^^^f^^^^ 

There  are,  besides,  a  few  verbs,  such  as  bide  2C(\A  gin^ 
that  are  rarely  to  be  met  with,  except  as  compounded. 

151.  An  examination  of  the  inflection  of  verbs  of 
the  strong  conjugation,  as  given  above,  brings  to  hght 
two  facts  which  it  is  important  to  comprehend  clearly ; 
for  they  serve  to  explain  much  that  may  seem  peculiar 
in  the  later  history  of  the  verbs.  These  facts  may  be 
stated  as  follows  :  — 

1.  That,  with  the  exception  of  the  verbs  belonging  to 
Classes  I.  and  IV.,  there  is  in  Anglo-Saxon  a  differ- 
ence of  vowel,  or  of  vowel-sound,  between  the  pret- 
erite singular  and  the  preterite  plural.  The  verbs  in 
which  this  vowel  variation  appeared  constitute  more 
than  three-fourths  of  the  strong  verbs  now  existing  in 
our  tongue. 

2.  That,  in  the  second  and  fifth  classes,  —  embracing 
about  one-half  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  strong  verbs  that 
have  been  transmitted  to  Modern  English,  —  the 
vowel  of  the  preterite  plural  and  of  the  past  participle 
is  precisely  the  same.  We  wrote,  for  illustration, 
would  be,  in  Anglo-Saxon,  we  writon  ;  written  would 
be  writen  ;  and  the  only  essential  difference  between 
the  two  forms  would  be  the  vowels  o  and  e  of  the  end- 
ings. In  one  instance  in  the  second  class,  and  in  all 
the  verbs  of  the  sixth  class,  the  vowel  of  the  preterite 
plural  was  u,  and  that  of  the  participle  o;  but  as,  in 
Eady  and  Middle  English,  o,  in  such  cases,  was  used 
for  u,  even  here  a  distinction  ceased  to  exist. 

152.  From  these  two  facts  have  resulted  in  Modern 
English  varying   forms  for  the  preterite  and   passive 


2/2  English  Language. 

participle,  the  origin  of  which  can  now  easily  be  traced. 
Let  us  take,  for  illustration,  the  history  of  the  preterite 
of  the  Anglo-Saxon  verb  singan,  '  to  sing ; '  for  the 
comprehension  of  the  development  of  one  verb  in- 
vokies  that  of  all. 

/1 53.  In  the  earhest  period  of  English,  when  one 
wished  to  say,  /  sa^tg,  or  sung,  he  used  the  form  I'c 
sang :  when  he  wished  to  say,  we  sang,  or  szmg,  he 
used  the  expression  we  sungo7t.  The  plural  preterite 
differed  from  the  singular  by  having  a  termination  on^ 
and  by  change  of  vowel.  After  the  break-up  of  Anglo- 
Saxon,  the  first  thing  to  be  affected  was  this  ending  on. 
In  accordance  with  the  principle  already  so  often 
stated,  the  vowel  o  was  weakened  into  e,  and  sungon 
became  sungen.  But,  along  with  this  weakening  of 
the  vowel,  there  was  also  a  tendency  to  drop  the  final 
n ;  and  sungen  became  sunge.  The  next  steps  were 
to  drop  the  final  e  in  pronunciation,  and  then  in  writ- 
ing ;  and  we  have,  in  consequence,  for  the  preterite 
plural,  the  form  S2mg.  Hence,  there  remained  as  a 
result  two  forms  for  the  preterite,  —  one  for  the  singular 
and  one  for  the  plural, —  differing  from  each  other  only 
by  a  single  letter,  and  that  letter  a  vowel.  This  state- 
ment requires  a  slight  modification.  The  second  per- 
son singular  of  the  preterite  had  the  same  vowel  as 
the  plural.  Sangest,  for  illustration,  would,  in  Anglo- 
Saxon,  be  sunge.  The  use  of  this  person,  much  more 
common  than  at  present,  helped  to  increase  the  con- 
fusion that  soon  arose  in  the  usage  of  an  uneducated 
people.     It  was   inevitable    that   a  distinction   seem- 


The   Verb.  273 

ingly  arbitrary,  and  serving  no  useful  purpose,  should 
break  down ;  and  this  was  what  happened.  For  a 
<vhile,  doubdess,  the  distinction  was  kept  up  by  indi- 
viduals long  after  it  had  disappeared  from  the  language 
of  the  great  mass  of  men.  To  say  /  sang  and  we 
sung  was,  probably,  vaguely  felt  by  many,  and  loudly 
maintained  by  some,  to  be  the  only  correct  usage ; 
even  after,  in  the  ordinary  speech,  men  had  become 
accustomed  to  say  indifferently,  /  sang  or  we  sang,  or 
/  sung  or  we  sung.  In  particular  verbs,  also,  the  dis- 
tinction lasted  much  later  than  it  did  in  others.  An 
examination  of  the  best  manuscripts  of  Chaucer's 
poetry  leaves  little  doubt,  that,  with  him,  gan  was  regu- 
larly the  singular  of  the  preterite,  gu7tnen,  gunne,  or 
gtm,  the  plural ;  and  the  same  statement  may  be 
made  as  to  his  use  of  schal,  '  shall,'  and  schulkft  or 
schulle.  But  even  in  his  time  the  distinction  between 
the  preterite  singular  and  plural  of  most  verbs  had 
broken  down  generally,  and  the  forms  originally  be- 
longing to  one  number  were  used  for  both ;  and,  not 
unfrequently,  both  forms  were  used  indifferently  and 
interchangeably.  Hence  arose  a  double  set  of  preter- 
ite forms,  such  as  drank  and  drunk,  began  and  begun, 
rang  and  rung,  sprang  and  spritng,  rode  and  rid, 
wrote  and  writ,  which  have  been  transmitted  to  Mod- 
ern English. 

154.  These  double  preterites  were  far  more  numer- 
ous in  the  Middle  English  period  than  now.  The 
tendency  of  the  language  has  been  to  steadily  reduce 
their  number;  and  many  forms^  which,  even  in  the 


2/4  English  Language. 

early  period  of  Modern  English,  were  in  good  use, 
have  now  disappeared  altogether,  or  are  heard  only  in 
the  language  of  low  life.  Ben  Jonson,  in  his  grammar, 
gives  a  long  list  of  verbs  that  had  two  different  forms 
for  the  preterite  in  his  time  ;  and,  in  a  large  proportion 
of  them,  one  form  is  now  obsolete  or  antiquated. 
Especially  is  this  true  of  Class  V.,  in  which,  according 
to  him,  bide  has  for  preterite  bode  or  Fid,  chide  has 
chode  or  chid,  drive  has  drove  or  drive,  rise  has  rose 
or  ris,  slide  has  slode  or  slid,  S77iite  has  siJiote  or  sviit, 
stride  has  strode  or  strid,  and  write  has  wrote  or  writ; 
and  in  Class  11.  he  gives  to  climb  the  two  preterites 
clomb  and  climb ;  to  fling,  the  preterites  flang  and 
flung;  to  swing,  the  preterites  swang  and  swung;  to 
wring,  the  preterites  ivrang  and  wrung,  and,  in  like 
manner,  double  forms  to  many  others. 

155.  In  all  these  instances  it  is  observed  that  one 
form  comes  from  the  singular  of  the  preterite,  the 
other  from  the  plural.  In  the  majority  of  instances 
only  one  form  continues  now  in  use ;  but  there  are 
still  a  number  of  verbs  which  retain  the  two,  —  one 
derived  from  the  original  singular  of  the  preterite,  the 
other  from  the  original  plural.  They  all  belong  to  the 
second  or  fifth  classes  of  the  strong  verbs ;  and,  in 
the  following  list,  the  Anglo-Saxon  original  forms  are 
added  in  parentheses. 

156.  The  verbs  now  possessing  double  forms  for  the 
preterite  are  the  following  :  — 


The   Verb. 


275 


Original  Smgular. 

Original  Plural. 

drink, 

drank  [dranc]. 

drunk  {dnmc-on). 

(be)gin, 

-gan  (gan), 

-gun  {gunn-on). 

ring, 

rang  {rang), 

rung  {rting-on). 

shrink. 

shrank  [scranc), 

shrunk  {scrunc-on). 

sing, 

sang  {sang), 

sung  {sung-on). 

spring, 

sprang  [sprang), 

sprung  {sprung-on). 

stink. 

stank  {stanc). 

stunk  {stmxc-on). 

swim, 

swam  {swam), 

swum  {swumm-on). 

ride, 

rod^  {rdd), 

rid  {rid-on). 

write, 

wrote  (xcra/), 

writ  {writ-on). 

To  these  must  be  added  the  word  ^/-^,  from  biddan 
of  Class  III.,  whose  forms  have  been  confounded  in 
later  English  with  those  of  bidan,  '  to  abide,'  of  Class 
V. ;  thus  giving  the  following  preterites  :  — 


bid, 


Original  Singular. 

bad(e)  {bc^d.  III.), 
{bdd,  v.). 


Original  Plural, 
bid  {bid-on,  v.). 


This  list  includes  only  those  forms  in  present  use, 
and  even  some  of  these  may  be  said  to  belong  to  the 
language  of  poetry  rather  than  of  prose. 

157.  But  most  of  the  strong  verbs  have  now  but 
one  form  of  the  preterite.  The  following  lists  show 
the  forms  that  have  been  derived  from  the  singular, 
and  those  from  the  plural,  in  the  classes  already 
mentioned. 

I.  Forms  derived  from  the  singular  of  the  pret- 
erite :  — 


V. 

(a)bide, 

-bode  (bdd). 

smite, 

smote  {smdt). 

cleave, 

clave  {ddf). 

shrive, 

shrove  {scrdf). 

276 


English  Language, 


drive, 

drove  {drAf). 

strid 

rise, 

rose  {rds). 

11. 

shine. 

shone  {scan). 

run, 

thrive. 

throve  {\rdf). 

stride,         strode  \:tr&d). 


ran  {ran). 


In  earlier  English  it  is  also  to  be  added,  in  regard 
lo  these  verbs  of  Class  V.,  that  the  vowel  a  was  more 
common  than  o,  the  latter  gradually  supplanting  it  in 
these  verbs  in  the  Middle  English,  and  in  many  cases 
even  earlier.  But  drave  lasted  down  to  the  sixteenth 
century,  and  is  still  used  in  poetry ;  while  other  forms 
with  the  vowel  a  survive  in  the  dialects. 

2.  Forms  derived  from  the  plural  of  the  pret- 
erite :  — 


II. 

V. 

I.  bind, 

bound  {bund-on). 

I.  bite,         bit  {bit-on). 

2.  cling, 

clung  {clung-on). 

2.  chide,       chid  {cid-on). 

3-  fight, 

fought  {fuht-on). 

3.  slide.       slid  {slid-on). 

4-  grind, 

ground  {grund-on). 

5-  sling, 

slung  {shing-on). 

6.  slink. 

slunk  {shinc-on). 

7.  spin, 

spun  {sptinn-on). 

8.  sting, 

stung  {stung-on). 

9.  swing, 

swung  {swung-on). 

Clomb,   the   preterite   of 

10.  win. 

won  {wunn-on). 

climb,  may  have  come  either 

II.  wind, 

wound  {wund-on). 

from  the  Anglo-Saxon  pret- 

12. wring, 

wrung  {wrung-07i). 

erite  singular  or  plural. 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  add  that  other  forms 
derived  from  the  singular  are  also  occasionally  to  be 
met  with,  especially  in  Middle  English  and  in  the 
earlier  period  of  Modem  English.  Span  and  swang, 
and  slank  and  chode,  and  others,  are  by  no   means 


The    Verb.  277 

infrequent  in  our  past  literature,  and  may  be  revived 
in  the  future. 

158.  It  is  evident,  that  in  the  verbs  of  the  second 
class,  wherever  only  one  form  has  been  selected,  the 
IModern  English  has  preferred  the  plural.  The  only 
exception,  indeed,  is  in  the  case  of  run  ;  and  this  was 
doubtless  due  to  the  fact  that  the  vowel  u  had  made 
its  way  into  the  present,  where  it  had  no  right :  and 
so,  instead  of  lin,  that  form  became  run  ;  and,  to  dis- 
tinguish the  preterite  from  the  present,  the  vowel  of  the 
singular  was  chosen.  On  the  other  hand,  the  verbs  of 
the  fifth  class  have,  in  most  cases,  chosen  the  singular 
forms.  This  may  seem  the  result  purely  of  accident ; 
but,  while  partly  so,  it  was  far  from  being  so  entirely. 
The  choice  of  the  plural  in  verbs  of  Class  II.  was 
largely  owing  to  the  influence  of  the  vowel  of  the  pas- 
sive participle,  which,  with  them,  was  either  the  same 
as  the  plural  of  the  preterite,  or  came  to  be  the  same. 
When  u  was  the  vowel  of  the  preterite  plural,  either 
//  or  0  was  the  vowel  of  the  participle,  as  can  easily 
be  seen  by  reference  to  the  examples.  In  Early  and 
Middle  English,  o  became  the  representative,  frequent- 
ly, of  the  original  tc  and  o.  Songen  and  wonnen,  for 
illustration,  might  be  either  the  plural  of  the  pret- 
erite or  the  passive  participle ;  and,  as  in  both 
forms,  the  dropping  of  the  termination  took  place  at 
about  the  same  time,  song(e)  and  won(ne)  became 
the  shortened  form  of  both  these  parts  of  the  verb ; 
and  when,  at  a  still  later  period,  the  zi  took  the  place 
in  pronunciation,  and  also  in  writing  (vvith  the  excep- 


2/8  English  Language. 

tion  of  woii) ,  of  the  o,  it  entered  alike  into  both  ihese 
parts  of  the  verb.  But  in  the  weak  conjugation  the 
preterite  and  past  participles  had  now  assumed  precisely 
the  same  form;  and  the  influence  of  this  inflection 
was  insensibly  brought  to  bear  upon  these  verbs,  so  as 
lo  make  them  conform  in  this  respect  to  the  practice 
of  the  vast  majority  of  verbs  in  the  language.  The 
plural  was,  therefore,  naturally  chosen,  when  the  selec- 
tion was  limited  to  one  form.  This  similarity  of  form 
of  the  preterite  and  past  participle  has  led  some 
grammarians  to  assert  that  the  forms  now  exhibited 
by  the  preterite  in  these  verbs  are  intrusions  of  the 
passive  participle ;  but  this  is  a  mistake.  They  are 
simply  in  their  origin  preterite  plurals,  which  the  simi- 
larity of  the  participle  aided  to  establish  over  the  pret- 
erite singular  as  the  exclusive  form  in  Modern  Eng- 
lish. 

159.  Why,  then,  did  not  this  become  the  practice 
in  the  verbs  of  Class  V.  ?  Why  was  it  that  here  the 
singular  form  has  been  preferred  in  Modern  English  ? 
This  is  due  to  the  fact,  that,  in  verbs  of  this  class,  the 
original  participle  either  dropped  out  of  the  language 
entirely,  or  retained  its  termination  en.  Shinen  and 
cliven,  the  participles  of  shine  and  cleave,  early  dis- 
appeared. Adidden,  from  abide,  lasted  to  a  later 
period ;  but  it  never  could  be  called  common.  On 
the  other  hand,  most  of  these  verbs  retained  their  full 
participial  forms,  such  as  risen,  driven,  S77iitten,  and 
the  like ;  and,  in  consequence,  there  was  not  a  con- 
stant resemblance  between  them  and  the  shortened 


The   Verb.  279 

form  of  the  preterite,  such  as  drive  and  ris  and  sniit 
The  latter,  in  consequence,  gave  way  generally  to 
the  singular  form.  In  the  three  cases  of  bite,  chide, 
and  slide,  in  which  the  plural  form  has  been  the  one 
adopted  in  Modern  English,  the  influence  of  the 
participle  must  be  regarded  as  having  decided  the 
matter;  for  in  each  of  them  bit,  chid,  and  slid  have 
been  common  shortened  forms  of  that  part  of  the 
verb. 

160.  But  there  are,  nevertheless,  a  number  of  verbs 
in  which  there  has  been  an  intrusion  of  the  vowel  of 
the  participle  into  the  preterite  :  these  belong  to  Class 
III.  (144).  In  Anglo-Saxon,  verbs  of  this  class 
whose  stem  ended  in  a  liquid  belonged  to  a  group 
which  had  0  or  tc  as  the  vowel  of  the  participle ;  as 
cuman,  ^to  come,'  had  for  the  passive  participle 
cunien,  and  beran,  '  to  bear,'  had  bo7'en.  Of  the  two, 
the  vowel  o  was  much  the  more  common.  But  there 
was  another  group  of  verbs  belonging  to  this  class, 
whose  stem  ended  in  a  consonant  not  a  liquid,  and 
with  these  the  vowel  of  the  passive  participle  was 
almost  always  e ;  thus  etan,  Ho  eat,'  and  ti^edan,  Ho 
tread,'  had  for  participles  eten  and  treden.  But,  even 
in  the  Anglo-Saxon  period,  the  0  of  the  participles  of 
the  first  group  sometimes  supplanted  the  e  of  the 
participles  of  the  second  group ;  and  spocen  and 
broce7t  are  more  common  than  specen  and  brecejt,  the 
strictly  regular  forms.  This  tendency  to  use  o  as  the 
vowel  of  the  past  participle  increased  after  the  l)reak« 
up  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  inflection;  and  from  the  parti- 


28o 


English  Language. 


ciple  it  made  its  way  into  the  preterite,  supplanting 
the  older  forms  in  a  of  verbs  belonging  to  this  class. 
There  are,  consequently,  two  forms  of  the  preterite  of 
these  verbs,  —  one  derived  from  the  vowel  of  the 
original  preterite,  and  the  other  from  the  vowel  of  the 
passive  participle.  The  first  of  these  are  the  older ; 
but  in  most  cases  they  have  now  gone  out  of  use. 
The  verbs  of  this  class  which  have  exhibited,  or  do 
exhibit,  these  double  forms  of  the  preterite,  are  the 
following :  — 

Infinitive.  New  Preterite.  Old  Preterite. 

bear,  bore,  bare, 

break,  broke,  brake, 

get,  got,  gat. 

shear,  shore,  share, 

speak,  spoke,  spake, 

steal,  stole,  stale, 

tear,  tore,  tare, 

tread,  trod(e),  trad. 

weave,  wove,  wave. 

By  a  false  analogy  with  these  verbs,  sweai',  which 
belongs  to  Class  IV.  (146),  and  whose  preterite  is,  in 
consequence,  %\x\(i\\y  swore  (A.S.  swor,  swor-on),  took 
to  itself  another  form  with  a,  sware,  which  is  now  rarely 
used  outside  of  poetry.  The  weak  verb  wear,  which, 
on  becoming  strong,  entered  this  class,  developed  like- 
wise two  preterites,  ware  and  wo7'e. 

161.  The  other  verbs  of  this  class  generally  follow 
the  ancient  inflection.  Bid,  as  already  mentioned, 
has  mixed  its  forms  with  those  cf  bide  (Class  V.).  The 
verb  eat  may  be  said  to  have  a  peculiar  history  of  its 


The   Verb.  281 

own,  a  long  vowel-sound  having  not  only  taken  the 
place  of  the  original  short  vowel-sound  of  the  stem 
et  in  the  infinitive  and  passive  participle ;  but  the 
vowel  of  the  preterite  in  Modern  English  is  some- 
times long  as  in  ate,  sometimes  short  as  in  eat:  in  the 
latter,  the  barbarous  spelling,  as  not  unusual,  gives  no 
clew  to  the  pronunciation. 

162.  The  verbs  of  the  first  and  fourth  classes,  hav- 
ing the  same  vowel-sound  in  the  singular  and  the 
plural  of  the  preterite,  have  never  developed  double 
strong  forms,  with  the  single  exception  of  swear,  which, 
as  already  mentioned,  had  given  to  it  the  preterite 
sware,  through  what  was,  strictly  speaking,  a  blunder. 
In  verbs  of  the  sixth  class,  the  o  of  the  preterite  can 
have  come  either  from  the  vowel  of  the  plural  or  from 
that  of  the  participle ;  for  in  Early  and  Middle  Eng- 
lish the  u  of  the  plural  had  become  o,  and  this  was  sufifi- 
cient  to  establish  the  exclusive  use  of  that  vowel  in  the 
preterites  of  the  few  verbs  now  in  use  that  belonged 
to  that  class. 

163.  A  few  verbs  of  this  sixth  class  underwent,  in 
the  Anglo-Saxon  period,  rhotacism  in  the  preterite 
plural  and  the  passive  participle  ;  that  is,  changed  their 
s  into  r.  Thus  the  Anglo-Saxon  kosan,  '  to  lose,'  had 
for  the  preterite  plural  luron  instead  of  luson,  and  the 
participle  loren  instead  of  losen  ;  and  when  this  verb, 
at  a  later  period,  passed  over  to  the  weak  conjugation, 
it  left  behind  it  its  participle  loren  in  the  adjective 
lorn,  seen  more  frequently  in  the  compound  forlorn. 
There  was  another  verb  of  this  kind  which  is  still  in- 


282  English  Language. 

fleeted  strong,  —  the  \voxdi  freeze  ;  but  it  has  given  up  its 
rhotacism,  though  a  poetic  adjective,  froren  or  fro  re, 
still  recalls  the  form  of  the  original  past  participle. 

164.  The  account  given  of  the  preterite  of  the 
strong  conjugation  has,  to  a  large  extent,  involved  an 
account  of  the  past  participle.  Still  the  latter  has,  in 
some  respects,  a  special  history  of  its  own ;  but,  on 
account  of  its  close  alliance  in  form  with  the  preterite, 
it  will  be  considered  next. 

The  Past  Participle  of  the  Strong  Conjuga- 
tion. 

165.  The  passive  participle  of  strong  verbs  was 
originally  formed  in  all  the  Teutonic  languages  by  add- 
ing to  the  stem  the  suffix  -na  with  the  connective  a, 
thus  making  the  termination,  exclusive  of  the  case- 
signs,  ana.  In  the  Anglo-Saxon  the  final  a  of  this 
ending  had  dropped,  and  the  initial  a  had  been  weak- 
ened into  e.  The  termination,  therefore,  in  the  earli- 
est period  of  English,  was  regularly  -en,  except  in  a  few 
instances  when  the  e  was  syncopated. 

166.  After  the  Norman  conquest  the  n  was  fre- 
quendy  dropped,  especially  in  the  South  of  England. 
Usage  on  this  point  was,  however,  very  variable  during 
the  whole  of  the  Early  axid  Middle  English  periods ; 
and  as  a  result  the  form  of  the  passive  participle  came 
into  Modern  Enghsh  with  a  good  deal  of  variation. 
These  diversities  can  be  arranged  under  the  following 
heads,  though  in  a  few  cases  the  differences  are  rathei 
orthographical  than  real. 


The   Verb.  z%% 

167.  (i.)  Some  verbs  have  lost  the  termination  en- 
tirely. This  includes  nearly  all  of  Class  II.  (143), 
but  none  outside  of  it.  Forms  like  degunnen,  rungen^ 
sungeft,  sprungeji,  and  others  of  this  class,  in  very  few 
cases  were  in  existence  at  the  beginning  of  Modern 
English.  Chaucer  occasionally  exhibits  the  full  form 
as  songen  (C.  T.  153 1)  j  but  with  him  the  n  is  usually 
dropped,  and  begonne,  songe,  and  spronge^  and  similar 
forms,  are  those  almost  invariably  met  with.  Eveil 
bounden,  drunken,  foughteti,  shrunken,  which  are  the 
only  full  forms  of  this  class  that  have  been  retained  in 
Modern  English,  are  almost  always  used,  when  used 
at  all,  as  adjectives.  Come,  of  Class  III.  might,  per- 
haps, be  properly  added  to  this  group ;  for  in  pronun- 
ciation, though  not  in  writing,  it  has  dropped  the 
termination  entirely.  Comen  is  not  uncommon  in 
Elizabethan  English,  being  frequently  met  with  in 
Bacon's  works ;  but  it  is  not  often  used  after  the  be- 
ginning of  the  seventeenth  century. 

168.  (2.)  Some  verbs  have  retained  the  termina- 
tion, though  in  some  of  them  the  e  is  syncopated ; 
but  this  is  the  only  contraction  they  undergo,  as  they 
never  drop  the  n.  They  come  from  all  classes  except 
the  second  (143)  and  sixth  (148),  and  are  about  the 
same  in  number  as  those  belonging  to  the  preceding 
group.  The  participles  fallen,  known  (I.),  given, 
torn  (III.),  shaken,  taken  (IV.),  and  driven,  risen 
(V.),  may  be  instanced  as  representatives  of  this  group, 
in  which  the  final  n  never  disappears. 

169.  (3.)   Between   these    groups   stands    a   third; 


284 


English  Language. 


which  has  double  forms  for  the  past  participle,  —  one 
with  the  ending  n^  the  other  without  it.  A  still  further 
distinction  might  be  made  in  the  fact  that  some  words 
drop  €71  entirely,  others  drop  only  n  ;  but  this  is  a  dis- 
tinction existing  merely  on  paper,  as  this  final  e  is  never 
sounded.  The  following  is  the  list  of  verbs  which 
exhibit  double  forms  of  the  past  participle,  with  the 
classes  to  which  they  belong  :  — 


I.  beat, 
II.  bind, 
II.  drink, 
II.  fight, 
II.  shrink, 
III.  bid, 
III.  break, 
III.  eat, 
III.  get, 
III.  speak, 
III.  steal, 
III.  weave, 
III.  tread, 
V.  bite, 
V.  chid, 


beaten, 

beat. 

bounden, 

bound. 

drunken, 

drunk. 

foughten, 

fought. 

shrunken, 

shrunk. 

bidden, 

bid. 

broken, 

broke. 

eaten, 

eat. 

gotten, 

got. 

spoken, 

spoke. 

stolen, 

stole. 

woven, 

wove. 

trodden, 

trod. 

bitten, 

bit. 

chidden, 

chid. 


V.  ride, 
V.  slide, 
V.  write, 
VI.  choose, 
VI.  cleave, 
VI.  freeze, 
VI.  shot, 
VI.  seethe, 


ridden, 

rid. 

slidden, 

slid. 

written, 

writ. 

chosen, 

chose. 

cloven, 

clove. 

frozen, 

froze. 

shotten, 

shot.       ; 

sodden,  i 

sod.         ' 


To  these  may  be  added  the 
originally  weak  verb -^/V/^  (Class 
v.),  which  has  the  two  forms 
hidden  and  hid  for  the  parti- 
ciple. 


The   Verb.  285 

In  regard  to  most  of  these  verbs  it  is  sufficient  to 
say  that  the  full  forms  are  now  generally  preferred, 
outside  of  those  belonging  to  the  second  class,  which, 
indeed,  can  now  hardly  be  reckoned  as  participles. 
But  there  is  no  established  rule  in  regard  to  these 
forms,  and  the  widest  diversity  of  usage  has  existed, 
and  still  continues  to  exist,  in  respect  to  many  of  them. 

170.  (4.)  A  certain  number  of  verbs  have  been 
mentioned  in  which  the  participial  forms  made  their 
way  into  the  preterite.  On  the  other  hand,  the  re- 
verse operation  has  happened  in  a  number  of  instances  : 
the  preterite  has  made  its  way  into  the  past  participle. 
In  some  cases  it  has  entirely  superseded  the  regular 
form ;  in  others,  it  has  taken  its  place  alongside  of  it. 
The  following  is  the  list  of  verbs  in  which  this  transi- 
tion of  the  preterite  into  the  participle  has  occurred, 
and  is  still  in  use  :  the  older  forms,  when  entirely , 
obsolete,  are  printed  in  Italic  :  — 


Infinitive. 

New  Passive  Participle. 

Old  Passive  Participle. 

I.  hold, 

held, 

holden. 

II.  drink, 

drank, 

drunk. 

III.  sit. 

sat, 

sitten,  \ 
sit.       S 

IV.  stand, 

stood. 

stonden. 

IV.  wake, 

woke. 

waken. 

V.  (a)bide, 

(a)bode, 

{a)bidden. 

V.  shine, 

shone, 

shinen. 

The  participles  waken  and  shineii  disappeared 
early ;  but  the  weak  form  of  waked  was  and  is  so 
generally  used,  that  the  use  of  woke  as  a  participle 


286  English  Language. 

may  even  now  be  regarded  as  uncommon.  It  was  in 
the  sixteenth  century  that  most  of  these  transitions 
were  effected ;  in  particular,  it  was  then  that  held, 
sat,  stood,  and  abode  were  estabhshed  as  passive  parti- 
ciples. Drank  and  drunk  are  both  in  use  at  the 
present  time,  and  the  choice  varies  with  the  writer. 

171.  These  words,  however,  are  only  the  relics  of 
what  was  once  a  general  movement,  which  has  been 
completely  arrested.  In  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth 
centuries  the  use  of  the  preterite  for  the  past  parti- 
ciple was  common  in  a  large  number  of  verbs  in 
which  it  is  no  longer  seen.  The  literature  of  the 
Elizabethan  period,  and  even  later,  abounds  in  in- 
stances of  the  use  of  drove  for  driven,  fell  for  fallen, 
rode  for  ridden,  rose  for  risen,  forsook  for  forsake?!, 
shook  for  shaken,  smote  for  smitten,  strove  for  striven, 
took  for  taken,  wrote  for  written,  and  doubtless 
numerous  other  like  forms.  In  some  cases  these 
preterites  used  for  the  regular  past  participle  lasted 
down  to  a  late  period.  Wrote,  for  illustration,  is  very 
common  for  written  in  the  literature  of  the  eighteenth 
century ;  and  at  the  present  day  these  forms  occasion- 
ally appear.  But  the  language  at  the  present  time  is 
averse  to  their  use,  and,  with  the  exception  of  those 
mentioned  in  the  preceding  section,  is  disposed  to 
exclude  the  employment  of  them  wholly. 

172.  Two  other  participial  forms  are  worthy  of  atten- 
tion. The  verb  dear  has  two  forms,  born  and  borne, 
and  in  ordinary  usage  limits  the  former  to  the  sense 
of  '■  brought  forth.'     The  difference  is,  in  its  origin,  a 


The   Verb.  287 

difference  of  spelling ;  and  the  distinction  is  unknown 
to  the  periods  before  Modern  EngHsh.  The  verb 
strike,  also,  which  has  passed  from  the  fifth  class  (147) 
to  the  second  (143),  has  usually  ^//-//(T/^  for  both  the 
preterite  and  the  past  participle ;  but  it  sometimes 
makes  use  of  the  original  participial  form  stricken, 
and  along  with  this  it  developed  a  form  strucken,  by 
adding  the  participial  ending  en  to  the  preterite. 

173.  The  origin  of  y,  as  prefixed  to  the  past  par- 
ticiple, will  be  given  in  the  account  of  the  past  parti- 
ciple of  the  weak  conjugation  (201). 

174.  This  concludes  the  discussion  of  the  principal 
parts  of  the  strong  conjugation.  It  will  be  seen  from 
this,  that,  since  the  beginning  of  the  Modern  English 
period,  that  conjugation  has  lost  none  of  the  verbs 
belonging  to  it ;  though  there  have  been  times  when 
it  seemed  as  if  weak  forms  of  all  would  become  uni- 
versal. The  tendency  of  the  language  at  present  is 
unquestionably  to  prefer  the  strong  form  wherever 
there  is  any  choice ;  and  it  is  not  impossible  that 
many  verbs  now  inflected  weak  will,  in  the  future, 
receive  back  their  old  inflection.  The  use  of  clomb 
in  poetry  is  becoming  more  and  more  common ;  and 
dive  (originally  of  Class  VI.)  frequently  assumes,  in 
the  language  of  common  life,  its  ancient  preterite 
dove,  and  this,  in  consequence,  occasionally  makes  its 
way  into  the  written  speech.  Cases  of  this  kind  may 
be  alwa)^s  expected  to  occur.  The  English  dialects 
also  have  retained  the  strong  form  in  some  cases 
where  the  literary  language  has  assumed  the  weak, 


288  E7tglish  Language. 

and  at  any  moment  the  original  inflection  may  be 
taken  up  by  the  latter  from  the  former.  These  dia- 
lects, indeed,  have  often  developed  strong  forms  in 
verbs  that  are  strictly  weak,  as  has  already  been  seen 
in  the  case  of  show,  shew,  which  is  found  both  in 
England  and  this  country.  So,  also,  squeeze  has  a 
strong  preterite  sqiwze  in  the  dialects  of  some  parts 
of  England;  and  this  can  be  heard,  likewise,  in 
various  parts  of  the  United  States  in  the  speech  of  the 
uneducated.  Sporadic  forms  like  these  crop  up  here 
and  there  constandy  in  our  literature  ;  and  their  occur- 
rence renders  it  unsafe  to  assert  that  particular  forms 
are  never  employed.  It  can  only  be  said  that  they 
are  not  the  ones  usually  employed. 

The  Weak  Conjugation. 

175.  It  has  already  been  pointed  out  that  the  dis- 
tinguishing characteristic  of  the  weak  conjugation  was, 
that  it  added  a  syllable  to  form  the  preterite ;  that  this 
syllable  was  nothing  more  than  a  verbal  form  corre- 
sponding to  the  reduplicated  perfect  of  the  English 
verb  do,  so  that  to  illustrate  an  ancient  usage  by  a 
modern  hypothetical  formation,  instead  of  employ- 
ing an  expression  equivalent  to  /  did  love,  the  preterite 
was  denoted  by  an  expression  equivalent  to  love-did- 
J ;  that  this  appended  verb  was  so  cut  down,  and  so 
closely  united  with  the  leading  verb,  that  it  was  only 
in  the  dual  and  plural  numbers  of  the  Gothic  preterite 
that  its  full  form  was  seen.  In  Anglo-Saxon  it  was 
represented  in  the  first  person  of  the  preterite  singular 


The   Verb.  289 

by  de,  as  hernan,  Uo  burn,'  had  for  its  past  tense 
berttde,  '  burned ; '  and  in  general  terms  it  may  be 
that  the  said  Anglo-Saxon  weak  verb  formed  its  pret- 
erite by  adding  de. 

176.  Its  passive  participle  was  also  distinguished 
from  that  of  the  strong  conjugation  by  the  fact  that 
the  latter  ended  in  eft ;  while  in  the  former  the  termi- 
nation was  d,  or  occasionally  /. 

177.  But  the  Teutonic  weak  verb  had  originally  a 
connective  which  entered  between  the  stem  and  the 
termination.  This  connective  in  its  full  form  was  aja  ; 
but  this  was  never  actually  seen,  for,  from  an  early 
period,  it  was  modified  in  three  ways.  Either  the 
initial  a  was  dropped,  and  the  connective,  in  conse- 
quence, became  ja,  vocalized  into  ia  ;  or  the  j  was 
dropped,  and  the  two  vowels  aa,  coming  together,  were 
contracted  usually  into  o  ;  or  the  final  a  was  dropped, 
leaving  the  connective  aj  vocalized  into  ai.  Accord- 
ing to  the  use  of  these  three  connectives  arose  in  the 
Teutonic  three  conjugations  of  weak  verbs,  all  of 
which  are  preserved  in  Gothic  and  Old  High  German. 
But  in  the  other  early  Teutonic  tongues  the  third  con- 
jugation above  mentioned,  the  one  with  the  connec- 
tive ai,  had  disappeared.  In  the  Anglo-Saxon  the 
two  first-named  conjugations  were  still  found  ;  though 
that  with  the  connective  6  was  showing,  in  some 
respects,  signs  of  decay,  the  forms  belonging  to  the 
conjugation  with  the  connective  ia  having  taken  its 
place  in  certain  parts  of  the  verb.  But,  even  in  this 
latter  conjugation,  the  ia  was  generally  weakened  to  e. 


290  English  Language, 

More  than  this,  the  connective  e  was  dropped  in  the 
preterite  in  the  case  of  all  verbs  with  long  stems.  The 
verb  hyr-an,  '  to  hear,'  with  its  long  stem  hyr,  formed, 
for  example,  the  preterite  hyrde.  ^  heard,'  not  hyr-e-de. 
And,  as  most  of  the  verbs  of  this  conjugation  had  the 
vowel  of  the  stem  long  by  nature  or  by  position,  there 
were  comparatively  few  that  formed  their  preterites  by 
adding  ede. 

178.  In  the  English  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  period, 
consequently,  there  may  be  said  to  be  two  conjuga- 
tions of  the  weak  verb,  —  one  forming  the  preterite  by 
adding  de,  and  occasionally  ede,  to  the  stem,  the  other 
by  adding  ode.  The  following  examples  will  illustrate 
the  differences  between  them  :  — 


dem-an,  deem,  dem-de.   i     -r 


der-ia-n,  harjn^  der-e-de. 

luf-ia-n,  love,  luf-o-de.      II. 

179.  These  represent  the  two  early  weak  conjuga- 
tions as  distinguished  from  each  other  in  the  preterite ; 
for  already  in  the  present  tense  the  connective  ia  of 
the  first  conjugation  had  made  its  way  into  the  second. 
But  within  certainly  a  century  and  a  half  after  the  Nor- 
man conquest  the  distinction  had  disappeared.  The 
connective  o  of  the  second  conjugation  was  generally 
weakened  to  e,  although  it  is  occasionally  found  even 
as  late  as  the  end  of  the  thirteenth  century,  and  per- 
haps still  later.  A  necessary  result  of  this  was,  that 
verbs  of  the  original  Anglo-Saxon  second  conjugation 
formed   their  preterites  precisely  like   short-stemmed 


The    Verb.  29I 

verbs  of  the  first  conjugation,  both  having  the  connec- 
tive e.  To  this  conformed,  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
Early  English  period,  and  still  more  in  the  Middle 
English  period,  many,  and  perhaps  most,  of  the  long- 
stemmed  verbs  of  the  first  conjugation.  Instead  of 
demde,  for  instance,  the  preterite  became  demede. 
The  connective  e,  consequently,  became,  by  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Middle  English  period,  the  general  con- 
nective of  the  weak  preterite,  which  it  has  always 
since  remained.  There"  were,  and  still  are,  exceptions 
to  this  statement;  but,  as  a  general  statement,  it  is 
sufficiently  accurate. 

180.  It  may  therefore  be  said  that  ede  in  the  Early 
English  period  was  added  to  the  stem  of  weak  verbs 
to  form  the  preterite ;  thus  the  past  tense  of  thank 
was  written  and  pronounced  thankede.  But  in  the 
fourteenth  century  certainly,  and  perhaps  earlier,  the  e 
final  of  ede  began  to  disappear  from  pronunciation, 
and  in  the  fifteenth  century  the  rule  became  general 
not  to  sound  it.  At  the  beginning  of  Modern  English 
it  had  disappeared  entirely.  Its  disuse  in  pronunciation 
led,  Hkewise,  to  its  disuse  in  writing  or  printing,  and 
thankede,  to  continue  the  same  illustration,  became 
thanked.  This  left  ed  as  the  addition  with  which  to 
form  the  preterite  in  Modern  English.  It  was  also 
attended  by  another  consequence.  As  the  past  parti' 
ciple  usually  ended  in  ed,  the  dropping  of  the  final  e 
of  the  preterite  was  followed  necessarily  by  the  result 
that  the  forms  for  the  preterite  and  past  participle 
became  the  same. 


292  English  Language. 

181.  But  the  modification  of  the  preterite  did  not 
stop  here.  At  the  beginning  of  the  Modern  Enghsh 
period  the  connective  e  of  the  preterite  —  and  the 
statement  is  hkewise  true  of  the  past  participle  — 
began  to  be  dropped  in  pronunciation.  During  the 
latter  part  of  the  sixteenth,  and  the  earher  part  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  usage  seems  to  have  varied.  In 
some  words,  or  by  some  persons,  the  ed  was  pro- 
nounced as  a  distinct  syllable;  and  in  other  words, 
or  by  other  persons,  the  e  was  not  sounded,  and  the  d 
was  joined  directly  in  pronunciation  to  the  preceding 
syllable,  where  it  necessarily  had  often  the  sound  of  /. 
Thanked  of  Middle  English  came,  in  consequence,  in 
Modem  English,  to  have  the  sound  of  thankt.  The 
tendency  to  drop  the  e  of  ed  in  pronunciation  went  on 
steadily  increasing,  and  became  general ;  though,  in 
writing,  the  full  orthographic  form  was,  in  the  large 
majority  of  instances,  retained.  At  the  present  time 
the  ed  is  rarely  heard  as  a  distinct  syllable,  save  in 
verbs  ending  in  d  or  /,  as  dread,  dreaded,  wet,  wetted ; 
and  in  certain  participles  used  as  adjectives,  such  as 
aged  and  learned,  to  distinguish  them  from  the  same 
words  when  used  strictly  as  participles.  The  dropping 
of  this  e  in  many  cases  caused  a  change  of  pronun- 
ciation, which,  in  return,  re-acted  upon  the  form  of  the 
preterite  ;  but  this  will  be  considered  later. 

182.  De,  ede,  ode,  and,  finally,  ed,  have,  accord- 
ingly, been  nhe  terminations  usually  added  to  form  the 
weak  preterite  during  the  various  periods  of  the  his- 
tory of  the  language      But,  even  in  Anglo-Saxon,  the 


The   Verb.  293 

ending  de  was  subjected  to  an  important  modifica- 
tion, the  influence  of  which  has  been  widely  extended 
in  Modern  English ;  and  from  it  have  sprung  a  num- 
ber of  peculiar  forms  for  the  preterite,  different  from 
those  regularly  formed.  As  the  connective  ia  weak- 
ened to  e  was  dropped  in  the  vast  majority  of  verbs 
of  the  first  weak  conjugation,  the  result  was,  that  de 
was  added  directly  to  the  stem,  as  in  the  preterite 
dcmde,  given  above  as  an  example  of  the  first  weak 
conjugation.  The  effect  of  this  was  often  to  change 
the  pronunciation  ;  and,  the  spelling  conforming  to  the 
sound,  d,  after  certain  consonants,  became  //  and  te 
was  the  syllable  added,  and  not  de.  In  Anglo-Saxon, 
this  was  regularly  the  case  when  the  stem  of  the  verb 
ended  in  c,  p,  t,  x,  and  sometimes  in  s,  as  will  be  seen 
by  the  following  examples,  in  which  the  past  participles 
are  given,  as  well  as  the  preterites.  It  will  be  noticed 
that  c  final  of  the  root  passes,  in  the  preterite,  into  h. 


Infinitives. 

Preterites. 

Past  Participles. 

secan,   seek^ 

sohte, 

soht. 

cepan,  keep^ 

cepte, 

ceped. 

cyssan,  kiss, 

cyste, 

cyssed. 

gretan,  greet, 

grette, 

greted. 

Hi' an.     shine, 

lixte, 

lixed. 

183.  In  the  Early  English,  some  of  these  verbs 
resumed  the  original  connective  e  before  the  ending, 
in  which  case  the  common  termination  de  was  again 
employed,  as,  kepede,  kissede,  for  kepte,  kiste ;  and 
this,  to  a  certain  extent,  diminished  the  number  of 
verbs  which  had  in  Anglo-Saxon  formed  their  preter 


294  English  Language. 

ites  by  adding  te.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  during  the 
Middle  Enghsh  period  their  numbers  were  largely 
swelled  by  other  agencies  which  were  in  operation. 
The  dropping  of  the  final  e  of  ede,  both  in  pronunci- 
ation and  in  writing,  it  has  already  been  shown,  was 
followed  by  the  dropping  of  the  connective  e  of  ed  in 
pronunciation,  and  sometimes  in  writing ;  so  that  ^was 
added  directly  to  the  stem.  After  certain  consonants, 
it  assumed  the  sound  of  t.  In  some  cases,  this  sound 
was  denoted  in  the  orthography,  as  it  should  have 
been  in  all;  but  in  many  other  cases  it  was  not. 
One  result  of  this  is,  that  a  large  number  of  verbs 
exist  in  jModern  English  which  have  their  preterites 
ending  in  ed  in  writing,  but  which,  in  speaking,  are 
almost  invariably  sounded  as  if  they  ended  in  /.  It  is 
hardly  necessary  to  observe  that  it  is  the  spoken  lan- 
guage only  that  has  any  vitality ;  and  a  spelling  of  the 
written  tongue  that  does  not  represent  the  sounds  of 
the  spoken  tongue  is  essentially  unscientific,  not  to 
say  barbarous.  Another  result  of  this  is,  that,  in  Mod- 
em English,  a  number  of  double  forms  for  the  preter- 
ites and  past  participles  have  been  developed,  differ- 
ing from  each  other,  in  some  cases,  only  in  spelling, 
and  not  at  all  in  pronunciation ;  and,  when  differing 
in  pronunciation,  they  differ  only  in  the  sound  of  final 
d  or  /.  They  usually  occur  in  words  ending  in  /,  //,  n, 
p,  sh,  and  words  ending  in  the  sound  of  s.  The  fol- 
lowing list  will  furnish  some  of  the  more  common 
illustrations :  — 


The   Verb. 


295 


spell, 


pen, 


learn, 


dip, 
fix. 


spelled,  ) 
spelt.  ) 
penned, 
pent, 
learned, \ 
learnt.  ) 
dipped,  ) 
dipt.  > 
fixed,  \ 
fixt.         S 


spoil, 
bless, 


spoiled,  ) 
spoilt.  ) 
blessed,  ) 
blest.  S 
cursed,  ) 
curst.      ) 


There  are  many  double  forms,  like  these,  to  be 
found  at  various  periods  in  our  literature  ;  but,  in  gen- 
eral, it  is  true  that  the  ending  in  t,  when  the  word  is 
so  pronounced,  is  found  much  oftener  in  the  early 
printed  literature  of  Modern  English  than  in  that 
which  appears  at  the  present  time. 

184.  The  dropping  of  the  final  e  of  the  termination 
de  or  te,  had,  likewise,  necessarily  the  effect  of  produ- 
cing a  contracted  form  for  the  preterite,  in  the  case  of 
verbs  whose  stems  ended  in  d  or  t,  and,  as  a  conse- 
quence, a  number  of  verbs  exist  in  Modern  English 
which  undergo  no  change  of  form  in  their  principal 
parts.  The  precise  history  of  these  verbs  can  be  clear- 
ly understood  by  a  comparison  of  the  changes  which 
the  Anglo-Saxon  conjugation  underwent  in  these  par- 
ticulars in  the  case  of  two,  —  spradan^  'to  spread,'  and 
settan,  '  to  set.' 


Past  Participle 
spr^ded. 
setted, ) 
set.       ) 


Infinitives. 

Preterites. 

spraedan. 

sprsedde. 

saltan, 

sette, 

296  English  Language. 

When  the  e  final  disappeared  in  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury firom  the  preterite  of  such  verbs,  the  second  d  or  t^ 
being  now  entirely  unnecessary,  was  also  dropped ; 
and  as,  by  that  time,  the  infinitive  had  dropped  its 
termination  an  weakened  into  en,  and  the  present 
most  of  its  personal  endings,  the  fonns  of  the  infini- 
tive, of  the  present,  and  of  the  preterite  came,  in  conse- 
quence, to  be  precisely  alike.  To  this,  the  past  par- 
ticiple also  early  conformed,  showing,  even  in  the 
Anglo-Saxon  period,  a  decided  leaning  toward  con- 
traction, as  witnessed  above  in  the  case  of  set,  found 
alongside  of  seited.  The  verb,  as  a  result  of  these 
various  changes,  and  droppings  of  the  terminations, 
exhibited  the  same  form  throughout.  But  the  ten- 
dency to  bring  about  this  result  was  not  limited  to  the 
verbs  of  the  kind  which  has  just  been  mentioned. 
Words  were  brought  also  into  this  class  which  did  not 
belong  to  the  Anglo-Saxon,  but  came  from  the  Norse 
or  the  Norman-French ;  and  words  which  in  Anglo- 
Saxon  added  ode  to  form  the  preterite,  and  not  simply 
de,  were  in  like  manner  made  to  conform  to  this 
inflection.  But  after  many  verbs  had  thus  been 
stripped  of  their  original  endings,  and  been  reduced 
to  one  unvarying  form  in  their  principal  parts,  a  re- 
action set  in.  In  the  Middle  English  period  began 
the  practice  of  adding  the  regular  termination  ed  to 
these  contract  forms,  and  this  gathered  strength  as 
time  went  on.  In  some  instances  this  has  been  wholly 
successful.  The  verb  stai't,  for  illustration,  which 
during  much  of  the  Middle  English  period  liad  the 


The  Verb. 


29; 


preterite  and  past  participle  start,  adopted  the  fuller 
form  started,  which  has  now  become  the  only  one. 
In  other  cases,,  contract  and  full  forms  of  the  preterite 
came  into  use,  and  have  since  been  retained  side  by 
side.  In  a  iQ.\^  instances  only  have  the  contract  forms 
become  the  exclusive  ones.  The  general  present  prac- 
tice of  the  language  in  regard  to  these  verbs  will  now 
be  exhibited. 

185.  (<2.)  The  following  are  those  which  have  only 
contract  forms  in  the  preterite  and  the  past  participle, 
and  therefore  have  all  the  principal  parts  the  same  :  — ■ 


I.  rid. 

8.  cost. 

15-  put. 

2.  shed. 

9.  cut. 

16.  set. 

3.  shred. 

10.  dight  (poetic). 

17.  shut. 

4.  spread. 

II.  hit. 

18.  spit. 

5.  (be)stead. 

12.  hurt. 

19.  thrust. 

6.  burst. 

13.  hight  (poetic). 

7.  cast. 

14.  let. 

186.  {b?)  The  following  are  those  which  have  double 
forms  for  the  preterite  and  past  f  larticiples  :  — 


1.  bet, 

2.  knit, 

3.  quit, 

4.  slit, 

5.  split. 


betted,    ) 
bet.         S 

6.  sweat. 

knitted, 
knit.       : 

7.  wet. 

quitted,  i 
quit.        ) 
slitted,    1 
slit.         S 

8.  whet, 

9.  wont. 

splitted,  ) 
split.       ) 

sweated, 

sweat. 

wetted, 

wet. 

whetted, 

whet. 

wonte  i, 

wont. 


187.  Whether  the  full  or  the  contract  form  shall  be 


298  English  Language, 

employed  is  merely  a  question  of  usage,  and  of  usage 
that  has  varied  at  different  periods.  In  the  above  list 
it  is  largely  a  matter  of  individual  preference  which 
shall  be  adopted.  The  number,  indeed,  might  be 
largely  extended,  if  the  various  forms  that  have  ap- 
peared at  various  times  in  the  writings  of  good  authors 
were  to  be  included.  The  contracted  form  wed  for 
wedded  is  not  infrequent.  In  the  early  period  of 
Modern  English,  lift  for  lifted  is  sometimes  met  with, 
and  other  unusual  forms,  either  full  or  contract,  are 
occasionally  to  be  found  in  our  literature.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  is  not  at  all  uncommon  to  find,  especially 
in  the  earlier  authors  of  the  Modern  English  period, 
forms  like  castcd,  and  hitrted^  and  bursted;  and  they 
are  hable,  in  the  very  nature  of  things,  to  appear  at 
any  time,  in  obedience  to  that  desire  to  bring  about 
uniformity  of  inflection,  which  plays  so  important  a 
part  in  the  development  of  language. 

188.  Somewhat  resembling  these  in  their  history  is 
another  series  of  contract  forms  for  the  preterite,  which 
arose  in  certain  verbs  whose  stems  ended  in  nd.  The 
conjugation  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  verb  sendan,  'to  send,* 
will  show  the  original  forms  :  — 

sendan,  sende,  sended. 

In  such  verbs  as  these,  the  dropping  of  the  e  of  the 
preterite  had  the  effect  of  changing  the  final  d  into  t: 
sende,  in  consequence,  became  sent.  It  is  not  impos- 
sible, indeed,  that  this  termination  came  into  the  pret- 
erite from  the  past  participle,  as  contract  forms  for 
that  part,  such  as  sent  for  sended,  appeared  not  in- 


The  Verb,  299 

frequently  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  period.  Here,  again, 
the  same  course  of  proceeding  took  place  as  in  the 
verbs  whose  history  has  just  been  given.  After  the 
contracted  forms  for  the  preterite  and  past  participle 
had  become  established,  new  and  strictly  regular  forms 
were  developed  in  some  cases  by  the  adding  of  ed. 
The  following  list  includes  the  verbs  that  have  this 
contract  form :  — 


I.  bend, 

bent. 

5.  send, 

sent. 

2.  blend, 

blent. 

6.  spend, 

spent. 

3.  lend, 

lent. 

7.  (wend. 

went). 

4.  rend, 

rent. 

Of  these,  bend  and  blend  have  often  the  fuller  forms 
bended  and  bleiided ;  while  we}it  has  become  the  pret- 
erite of  the  verb  go,  and  wend  has  developed,  to  take 
its  place,  the  regular  form  wended  (266). 

189.  After  this  same  method,  several  verbs  not 
having  the  termination  of  the  stem  in  nd,  but  in  Id 
and  rd,  have  likewise  developed  a  contracted  preterite 
and  past  participle,  and,  along  with  it,  a  full  form. 
The  following  is  the  list :  — 

..ge,d,         gf^-l         ,.g.d.         ^'\ 

These  are  to  be  distinguished  from  such  preterites 
as  lea7'ned  and  learnt,  dwelled  and  dwelt,  mixed  and 
mixt,  passed  2ixA  past  (183)  ;  for  in  these  latter,  while 
there  is  an  actual  difference  in  the  spelling,  there  is 
usually  no  additional  syllable  heard  in  the  pronuncia- 
tion. 


300  English  Language. 

I  go.  All  of  the  irregular  weak  verbs  that  have  so  far 
been  mentioned,  not  only  retain  the  same  vowel 
through  all  their  principal  parts ;  they  retain  also  the 
same  length  of  that  vowel.  We  now  come  to  the  dis- 
cussion of  certain  verbs  of  which  the  vowel  of  the 
stem  was  either  shortened  in  the  preterite  and  the 
past  participle,  or  was  changed  entirely. 

igi.  This  first  class,  which  shortened  the  stejn- 
vowel,  is  a  development  of  the  Early  and  Middle 
English  periods ;  for  no  such  shortening  was  known  to 
the  Anglo-Saxon.  It  seems  to  have  been  largely  due  to 
the  influence  of  the  short  vowel  of  the  preterite  plural 
in  certain  strong  verbs,  which  plural  had  become,  with 
them,  the  usual  form  for  both  numbers  ;  as,  chide,  cMd, 
shoot,  shot.  This  class  may  be  conveniently  subdivided 
mto  two.  The  first  will  embrace  the  verbs  whose 
stems  ended  in  d  or  t,  especially  the  former.  These 
dropped  the  de  or  te  of  the  termination,  like  the  class 
to  which  spread  and  set  belonged  (184)  ;  but  they 
differed  from  them  in  having  the  vowel  of  the  pret- 
erite shorter  than  that  of  the  infinitive  or  present.  The 
list  embraces  the  following  verbs,  to  which  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  primitives  are  subjoined  :  — 


I.  bleed, 
bledan 

bled. 
bledde 

f 

meet, 
met  an 

met. 
viette 

2.  breed, 
bredan 

bred. 
bredde 

6. 

read, 

redan 

read. 

7'edde 

3.  feed, 
/Man 

4.  lead, 

Iddan 

fed. 

fedde 

led. 
lddd€. 

7- 

speed, 
spMan 

(be)tide, 
tidian 

sped. 

spedde 
^tid. 

tidde. 

The  Verb,  301 

It  will  be  noticed  that  read,  in  Modern  English, 
actually  shortens  the  vowel  of  the  preterite  and  past 
participle,  although  no  change  takes  place  in  the  spell- 
ing. To  the  list  may  also  be  added  heat  (A.-S.,  hceta7i, 
hatte),  which  in  Elizabethan  English  had  a  preterite 
and  participle  het,  along  with  the  full  form,  heated;  and 
this  is  still  heard  in  the  language  of  low  life.  To  it 
may  also  be  added  the  two  following  verbs,  with  their 
double  forms  for  the  preterite  and  participle  :  — 

,      ,  pleaded,  \  ...  lighted,  I 

plead,  1^   J       C  light,  ,.^  \ 

^        '  plead.      )  ^    '  lit.  ) 

Hide,  hu/,  etymologically  should  also  be  reckoned 
here;  but,  as  explained  in  sect.  134,  it  seems  best  to 
regard  it  as  a  strong  verb.  Betide  sometimes  exhibits 
the  full  regular  form  betided,  as  also  speed  in  certain 
senses  has  speeded. 

Plead  is  of  Romance  origin ;  while  light  represents 
two  Anglo-Saxon  verbs,  lyhta?t,  'to  shine,'  and  lihtafi, 
'  to  make  lighter,'  and  '  to  alight.' 

192.  The  second  subdivision  embraces  those  verbs 
whose  stem  ends  in  a  vowel,  in  the  liquids,  /,  7n,  n,  and 
r,  and  in  /,/,  and  s.  The  list  embraces  the  following 
words,  of  which  flee,  creep,  leap,  sleep,  sweep,  weep,  and 
lose,  belonged,  in  Anglo-Saxon,  to  the  strong  conjuga- 
tion ;  while  kneel  is  not  a  form  known  to  the  original 
tongue.  To  the  others  the  Anglo-Saxon  forms  are 
added. 


I.  flee, 

fled. 

3.  deal, 

dealt. 

2.  shoe, 

shod. 

ditlan 

decide 

scedan 

scedde 

4.  feel, 

felt. 

filan 

filde 

302  English  Language, 


5- 

kneel, 

knelt. 

6. 

dream, 

dreamt. 

dremaji 

drhtide 

7- 

lean, 

leant. 

hlinian 

hlinode 

8. 

mean, 

meant. 

mdnan 

mccnde 

9- 

hear, 

heard. 

hyran 

hyrde 

10. 

creep, 

crept. 

II.  keep. 

kept. 

cepati 

cepte 

12.  leap. 

lept. 

13.  sleep. 

slept. 

14.  sweep. 

swept. 

15.  weep, 

wept. 

16.  lose, 

lost. 

To  these  may  be  added  three  verbs  which  now 
change  a  z^  of  the  infinitive  into  /  in  the  preterite  and 
participle  :  of  these,  cleave  was  originally  strong  :  — 

cleave,     cleft.        leave,     left.         (be)reave,    -reft. 

Idfan,    Ic^fde.     7'edfia7i^         rcdfode. 

In  a  large  number  of  these  words,  Middle  and  Mod- 
ern English  have  developed  full  forms  alongside  of 
the  contracted  ones,  and  some  of  the  former  are  even 
more  common  than  the  latter.  The  verbs  which  have 
had,  or  still  have,  these  double  forms,  are  deal,  kneel, 
dream,  lean,  leap,  cleave^  and  {be)reave,  which  exhibit, 
either  generally  or  occasionally,  the  regular  forms 
dealed,  kneeled,  dreamed,  leaned,  leaped,  cleaved,  and 
{be')  reaved.  Full,  regular  forms  of  some  of  the  others 
likewise  occur,  but  not  often. 

193.  The  vowel-variation  that  took  place  in  the 
above  verbs  was,  as  has  been  said,  unknown  to  the 
earliest  period  of  the  language.  At  that  time,  nearly 
every  one  of  the  above-mentioned  verbs  that  existed 
in  it  and  was  inflected  weak  had  a  long  vowel  in  all 
the  principal  parts,  as  the  primitive  forms  show  dis- 


The  Verb. 


303 


tinctly.  In  Anglo-Saxon  there  were,  however,  a  num- 
ber of  verbs  of  the  weak  conjugation,  in  which  there 
was  a  real  variation  of  vowel  in  the  preterite.  A  few 
of  these  have  disappeared  from  the  tongue  altogether, 
others  have  become  perfectly  regular;  but,  of  those 
that  have  continued  to  show  this  vowel-variation,  the 
following  list  gives  the  principal  parts  as  found  both  in 
Anglo-Saxon  and  Modern  English.  It  is  to  be  noticed, 
that  in  the  former  2i  c  ox  g  final  of  the  stem  became, 
in  the  preterite,  h. 


194. 

Infinitives. 

Preterites. 

Past  Part. 

Infinitives. 

Preterites. 

Past  Part 

bringan, 

brohte, 

broht. 

bring, 

brought, 

brought. 

bycgan, 

bohte, 

boht. 

buy, 

bought. 

bought. 

secan, 

sohte, 

soht. 

seek, 

sought, 

sought. 

sellan, 

sealde, 

seald. 

sell, 

sold, 

sold. 

tellan, 

tealde, 

teald. 

tell, 

told, 

told. 

pencan, ////V//', 

,  pohte, 

poht. 

think, 

thought, 

thought. 

I'yncan,  seetn, 

puhte, 

puht. 

(me)  thinks. 

,  (me)thouj 

ght. 

wyrcan, 

worhte, 

worht. 

work, 

wrought, 

wrought. 

Of  these  verbs,  work  has  developed  also  a  regular 
form,  worked ;  and,  although  this  did  not  come  into 
common  use  before  the  eighteenth  century,  it  is  now 
much  more  widely  employed  than  the  earlier  wrought. 
On  the  other  hand,  tacan,  ^to  teach,'  which  had  no 
variation  of  the  vowel-sound  in  Anglo-Saxon,  its  pret- 
erite being  tkhte,  has  developed  a  variation  in  later 
periods  in  the  forms  teach,  taught;  while  catch,  a  word 
that  did  not  make  its  appearance  in  the  language  until 
after  the  Norman  conquest,  has,  in  like  manner,  formed 
a  preterite,  caught.     Reach  (A.-S.,  racan,  r&hte)  and 


304  English  Language. 

stretch  (A.-S.,  streccan,  sti-eahte)  are  also  verbs,  which, 
in  Old  and  Middle  English,  had  their  preterites  raught 
and  straught;  but  during  the  Modern  English  period 
they  have  been  almost  invariably  inflected  reached  and 
st7  etched,  though  the  earlier  forms  sometimes  occur. 
At  various  periods,  also,  some  other  of  these  verbs 
have  been  inflected  regularly.  Especially  is  this  true 
of  catch,  teach,  and  tell,  and  the  compound  beseech, 
all  of  which  occasionally  exhibit  the  forms  catched, 
teached,  telled,  and  beseeched ;  but  the  earlier  preter- 
ites have  always  been  preferred. 

195.  The  form  fraught  is  also  to  be  reckoned  with 
the  foregoing.  When  employed  at  all,  it  is  almost  in- 
variably used  as  the  past  participle  of  freight;  but  it 
belongs,  in  its  origin,  to  a  verb  spelled  in  precisely 
the  same  way,  which  was  an  allied  form  of  the  verb 
freight,  and  probably  the  older  of  the  two,  but  which 
has  now  gone  out  of  use.  Fraught  may  therefore  be 
described  as  the  obsolescent  participle  of  an  obsolete 
verb. 

196.  Three  verbs  have  undergone  contractions  pe- 
culiar to  themselves.  These  are  have,  in  which  the 
existing  preterite  has  been  cut  down  from  the  Old 
English  havede ;  make,  in  which  made  has  been  simi- 
larly cut  down  from  the  Old  English  make de ;  diwdi 
clothe.  The  Anglo-Saxon  inflection  of  the  last-named 
was  dorian,  cld^ode,  cld^od ;  but  in  Early  and  Middle 
English  the  contracted  forms  for  the  preterite  and  past 
participle,  cladde  and  clad,  were  used  along  with  the 
fuller  forms,  and  the  two  have  lasted  down  to  our 
time. 


The  Verb.  305 

197.  With  the  statement  that  certain  verbs  ending 
in  y  change  this  y  to  /  in  the  preterite,  as  say,  said, 
pay,  paid,  —  which  is  nothing  more  than  an  ortho- 
graphic variation,  —  the  history  of  all  the  anomalous 
forms  of  the  weak  verbs  now  existing  has  been  given. 
Anomalous  forms  not  mentioned  here  can,  indeed, 
occasionally  be  found;  but  they  are  all  explainable 
according  to  the  analogy  of  the  contracted  forms  that 
have  been  described.  In  general,  also,  the  history  of 
the  past  participle  of  the  weak  verb  is,  since  the  fif- 
teenth century,  the  same  as  the  history  of  the  preter- 
ite, when  the  dropping  of  the  final  e  by  the  latter 
brought  about  in  them  both  identity  of  form.  The 
few  additional  explanations  in  its  history,  not  involved 
in  the  history  of  the  preterite  just  given,  will  now  be 
stated. 

PAST  PARTICIPLE   OF  THE   WEAK   CONJUGATION. 

198.  The  past  participle  of  weak  verbs  was  formed 
in  the  primitive  Indo-European  by  adding  to  the  stem 
the  suffix  ta.  Of  this  the  consonant  appeared  in  the 
early  Teutonic  tongues  as  ih,  t,  or  d.  In  Anglo-Saxon 
it  was  d ;  and,  as  the  vowel  of  the  suffix  had  dis- 
appeared, it  was  d  only  that  was  added.  This  was 
joined  on  directly  to  the  connective  o  of  the  second 
weak  conjugation,  as  luf-o-d,  '  loved  ; '  or  to  the  con- 
nective e  of  the  first  weak  conjugation,  as  dem-e-dy 
'deemed'  (178).  But  sometimes  this  connective  e 
was  dropped,  in  which  case  d  often  became  /. 

199.  When  the  distinction  between  the  two  weak 


3o6  English  Language. 

conjugations  disappeared  in  the  Early  English  period, 
€  became,  in  general,  the  connective  for  all  verbs,  and 
dox  t  was  usually  added  to  it,  though  sometimes  they 
were  added  directly  to  the  stem.  The  dropping  of  the 
final  e  of  the  ending  ede  of  the  preterite,  in  the  Middle 
English  period,  had,  necessarily,  the  direct  effect  of 
bringing  about  a  perfect  similarity  of  form  between 
the  preterite  and  past  participle ;  and,  as  has  already 
been  shown,  the  latter  was  subjected  to  precisely  the 
same  changes  which  befell  the  former.  To  this  there 
is  one  slight  exception. 

200.  Either  after  the  analogy  of  verbs  whose  past 
participle  is  precisely  the  same  in  form  as  the  present, 
as  hit,  hurt,  or  because  they  were  made  to  resemble 
their  Latin  primitives,  a  number  of  verbs  in  the  Mid- 
dle English  period  did  not  always  add  d  to  form  the 
past  participle ;  as  consummate  (Lat.  constimmat-us) 
for  consummated,  create  (Lat.  creat-zts)  for  created, 
pollute  (Lat.  poliut-us)  for  polluted.  These  forms 
without  final  d  usually  belong  to  words  that  are 
derived  from  Latin  verbs  of  the  first  conjugation ;  but 
they  are  not  limited  to  them.  The  usage  extended 
down  to  the  Modern  Enghsh  period,  and  can  hardly 
be  said  to  have  been  abandoned  before  the  end  of  the 
seventeenth  century.  Certain  writers  are  remarkable 
for  their  fondness  for  such  forms.  As  a  general  use, 
they  are  employed  in  an  adjectival  sense;  but  even 
then  their  participial  character  is  plainly  apparent. 
The  participle  situate  for  situated,  common  in  legal 
phraseology,  is  a  survival  of  this  usage. 


The  Verb.  307 

201.  The  Anglo-Saxon  prefix  ge  has  had  also  a 
special  history  of  its  own  in  connection  with  the  past 
participle  both  of  the  weak  and  of  the  strong  conju- 
gation. In  the  earliest  period  of  the  language  it  was 
affixed  indifferently  to  nouns,  adjectives,  pronouns^ 
adverbs,  and  verbs.  There  was  not,  in  the  case  of  the 
verb,  any  disposition  originally  to  restrict  it  to  the  past 
participle ;  but  this  became,  in  Early  and  Middle 
English,  the  prevailing,  though  not  absolutely  exclusive, 
practice.  But  the  prefix  sometimes  suffered  a  change 
of  form  before  the  Conquest,  which  change,  after  the 
Conquest,  became  habitual.  For  ge,  either  y  or  /  is 
found  from  the  twelfth  century  on ;  and  in  the  manu- 
scripts these  two  letters  frequently  appear  as  capitals, 
Y  or  /.  During  the  thirteenth,  fourteenth,  and  even 
the  fifteenth  centuries,  this  y  or  /  was  widely  used,  but 
more  particularly  in  the  speech  of  the  South.  Parti- 
cipial forms  like  ilenf,  ymaked,  isworn,  ygo,  'gone,' 
ybe,  'been,'  are  exceedingly  common  in  the  literature 
of  the  fourteenth  century.  And  not  only  was  this  y  or 
/  applied  indifferently  to  verbs  of  the  weak  or  of  the 
strong  conjugation,  it  was  applied  with  equal  indiffer- 
ence to  foreign  or  native  words.  The  Northern  dialect, 
however,  never  made  use  of  this  prefix  to  any  extent, 
hardly  even  at  all,  except  in  the  writers  who  directly 
imitated  the  language  of  Chaucer ;  and  it  seems  as  if 
the  influence  of  that  dialect  of  the  language  had  in 
this  respect  prevailed  over  the  usage  of  the  South  and 
the  Midland.  In  the  fifteenth  century  the  employ- 
ment of  y  or  /  with  the  participle  began  to  be  given 


308  English  Language. 

up,  and  in  the  sixteenth  century  it  practically  disap. 
peared.  It  occasionally  made  its  appearance  much 
later,  and  is  even  seen  at  times  in  poetry  to  this  day, 
especially  in  burlesque,  or  in  imitation  of  the  archaic 
style. 

Number  and  Person. 

202.  As  regards  the  three  primitive  numbers,  the 
Gothic  was  the  only  one  of  the  Teutonic  languages  that 
retained  the  dual  of  the  verb;  but,  even  in  that,  it 
was  confined  to  the  first  and  second  persons.  At  the 
time  that  language  was  committed  to  writing,  the  third 
had  disappeared  ;  and,  in  order  to  say  that  "  they  two  " 
had  done  any  thing,  the  plural  form  had  to  be  used. 
The  English  verb,  through  all  the  stages  of  its  history, 
knows  only  of  the  singular  and  plural  numbers  :  no 
trace  of  a  dual  appears  in  its  earhest  monuments. 

203.  The  commonly  received  theory  as  to  the  origin 
of  the  personal  endings  is,  that  the  personal  pronoun, 
as  the  subject  of  a  verb,  was  originally  placed  after  it, 
and  not  before  it  as  now ;  just  as  if  we,  instead  of  say- 
ing I  hate,  ye  hate,  should  say,  hate  /,  hate  ye,  and  so 
on  for  the  other  persons.  These  pronouns,  appended 
to  the  stem  of  the  verb,  gradually  united  with  it  so  as 
to  form  one  word ;  as  even  in  Early  Enghsh,  for  illus- 
tration, thinkest  thou  or  sayest  thou  often  appears  as 
one  word,  thinkestow,  seistow.  Thus  joined  to  the 
verb,  they  came  at  last  to  be  regarded  as  an  inseparable 
part  of  it,  as  really  belonging  to  it,  and  were  then  used 
to  form  the  inflecdoi:  of  the  tense  j  and,  as  the  per- 


The   Verb.  309 

ional  pronoun  originally  appended  to  each  person  to 
denote  the  subject  was  different,  the  endings  were 
necessarily  in  all  cases  different  at  first.  When  these 
pronouns,  however,  had  become  so  thoroughly  united 
with  the  verb  as  to  form  one  word,  the  recollection 
of  their  original  pronominal  character  passed  away  : 
they  were  simply  looked  upon  as  an  integral  part 
of  the  inflection  of  the  verb,  and  not  as  separate 
words  or  syllables  denoting  the  subject.  After  this 
result  had  been  reached,  a  personal  pronoun  was 
frequently  put  before  the  verb  as  its  subject;  and 
this  naturally  became  more  and  more  common  as 
the  sense  of  the  original  pronominal  nature  of  the 
personal  ending  became  fainter  and  fainter.  When 
it  had  become  a  common  practice  to  employ  the 
personal  pronoun  as  the  subject  of  the  verb,  and 
usually  preceding  it,  the  necessity  of  an  ending  to 
denote  the  person  was  gone  :  that  was  denoted  by  the 
personal  pronoun  which  was  the  subject.  The  value 
of  distinct  terminations  for  the  persons  was  accord- 
ingly destroyed.  Undei  such  circumstances,  it  was 
inevitable  that  in  some  cases  the  terminations  should 
be  confounded,  and,  if  much  confounded,  that  many 
of  them  in  course  of  time  should  disappear.  This  has 
been  fully  exemphned  in  the  history  of  the  Teutonic 
languages,  and  of  our  own  in  particular.  In  Gothic 
there  is  a  distinct  termination  for  each  of  the  three 
persons  of  the  plural  of  the  present  indicative,  —  m 
for  the  first  person,  th  for  the  second,  and  nd  for  the 
third  :   but  in  Anglo-Saxon  this  diversity  of  endings 


3IO  English  Language. 

had  been  given  up :  the  endings  of  the  first  and 
third  persons  had  been  entirely  abandoned,  and  the 
ending  of  the  second  person,  th,  had  become  the 
common  ending  of  the  three.  In  the  Anglo-Saxon 
subjunctive  there  was  a  distinction  of  form  between 
the  singular  and  the  plural ;  but  the  three  persons  of 
the  singular  had  all  the  same  termination,  as  had  like- 
wise the  three  persons  of  the  plural  the  same ;  in  this 
respect  differing  again  from  the  older  tongue,  the 
Gothic,  which  in  this  mood  still  preserved  the  dis- 
tinction of  persons  by  the  endings.  In  the  preterite 
plural  the  Anglo-Saxon  had  only  one  termination  for 
the'  three  persons,  which  termination  was  originally 
that  of  the  third  person,  and  had  been  extended  to 
the  other  two.  But  barren  of  these  endings  as  is  our 
earhest  speech  when  compared  with  the  Gothic,  it  is 
rich  when  compared  with  what  we  have  to-day.  The 
history  of  the  tenses  will  show  the  steady  loss  in  this 
respect  that  has  overtaken  the  inflection. 

TENSES   OF   TIJE   VERB. 

204.  The  Enghsh,  like  all  the  Teutonic  tongues,  has 
but  two  simple  tenses,  —  the  present  and  the  preterite. 
About  them  as  centres  have  been  developed  verbal 
phrases  which  express  the  ideas  and  relations  con- 
veyed by  the  fuller  forms  to  be  found  in  other  lan- 
guages. The  use  of  these  two  tenses  is  far  more 
limited  in  Modern  Enghsh  than  it  was  in  the  ancient 
speech ;  for  the  present  then  generally  expressed  also 
the  ideas  for  which  we  now  use,  not  merely  the  future 


The   Verb.  311 

but  the  future-perfect;  while  the  preterite  denoted 
what  is  now  conveyed  by  Ihe  imperfect,  the  perfect, 
and  the  pluperfect.  These  forms  have,  moreover, 
undergone  changes  so  various,  that  it  will  be  necessary 
to  consider  each  one  of  the  two  simple  tenses  by 
itself. 

THE   PRESENT   TENSE,    INDICATIVE   AND   SUBJUNCTIVE. 

205.  The  follovdng  paradigms  of  the  strong  verb 
singan,  *to  sing,'  and  the  weak  verb  iufian,  'to  love,' 
will  show  the  inflection  of  the  present  indicative  and 
subjunctive  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  period.  To  them  is 
also  appended  the  indicative  singular  of  the  verb 
rtdan,  '  to  ride,'  both  in  the  full  and  also  the  contract 
forms,  which  are  often  found  in  verbs  whose  stems 
end  in  d  and  /,  and  even  s. 

200.      Sing.       Indicative.      Subjunctive.  Indicative,      Subjunctive. 

1.  ic      sing-e,         sing-e,      luf-ie(ige),    luf-ie, 

2.  p^     sing-e-st,     sing-e,      luf-a-st,  luf-ie, 

3.  he     sing-e-tS.     sing-e.      Iuf-a-t5,  luf-ie. 

PI. 

1.  we^ 

2.  ge  y  sing-a-S.     sing-en.   luf-ia-S.         luf-ie-n. 

3.  ^^  ) 

Sing. 

1.  u    rid-e,  rid-e 

2.  />u   rid-e-st,  rist, 

3.  he    rid-e-S.  rit. 

In  these  paradigms  it  will  be  seen  that  the  stem  of 
singan  is  sing;  the  connective  is  a  weakened  to  e  in 


312  English  Language. 

the  singular  of  the  mdicative  and  in  both  numbers  of 
the  subjunctive;  and  the  personal  endings,  so  far  as 
they  have  been  preserved,  are  st  of  the  second,  and 
•S  of  the  third  person  singular,  S  of  the  plural  indica- 
tive, and  n  of  the  plural  subjunctive.  Most  verbs  of 
the  first  weak  conjugation  do  not  differ  here  from  the 
strong  verb  in  their  inflection.  In  the  second  weak 
conjugation  it  will  be  noticed  that  the  connective  o 
has  been  abandoned  in  tliis  tense,  and  its  place  taken 
by  the  connective  ia  of  the  first  conjugation  (177), 
which,  however,  is  only  seen  pure  in  the  plural 
indicative. 

207.  This  is  the  common  inflection  in  the  Anglo- 
Saxon,  as  it  is  exhibited  in  the  classical  dialect,  the 
West-Saxon.  But,  after  the  Norman  conquest,  the 
present  tense  of  the  verb  presented  marked  differences 
of  form  in  the  three  great  dialects  of  the  English 
speech  that  arose  and  developed  literatures  of  their 
own  during  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries. 
According  to  each  of  these,  the  verb  singe  {it)  would 
exhibit  the  foUowing  forms  in  this  tense ;  and  what  is 
true  of  it  is  true  also  of  verbs  of  the  weak  conjuga- 
tion. 


Sing. 

Southern. 

MidlaEd  (East). 

Northern. 
ist  Form.       2d  Form. 

I. 

sing-e, 

sing-e, 

sing,            sing-e(s), 

2. 

sing-est, 

sing-est, 

sing-es,        sing-es, 

3- 
PI. 
2.  3. 

sing-eth. 

sing-eth. 

sing-es.       sing-es. 

sing-eth. 

sing-en. 

sing.            sing-es. 

208.  It  is  evident  at  a  glance   that  the   Southern 


The   Verb,  313 

forms  are  much  nearer  the  classic  Anglo-Saxon  than 
either  of  the  others ;  and  that  the  Midland  are  nearer 
the  Southern  than  they  are  to  the  Northern.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  is  to  be  remarked  that  the  Northern 
forms  in  s  go  back  to  a  period  before  the  Conquest, 
although  the  dearth  of  the  Northumbrian  literature, 
and  the  uncertainty  attending  the  date  of  composition 
of  the  litde  that  has  been  preserved,  make  positive 
statements  hazardous  as  to  the  time  of  the  transition 
of  the  final  6  into  s,  or  the  extent  of  usage  of  the  lat- 
ter. It  will  be  observed,  however,  that  there  are  two 
sets  of  Northern  forms,  one  of  which,  though  going 
back  to  the  thirteenth  century,  is  far  nearer  Modern 
English  than  either  of  those  found  in  the  Midland  or 
the  South.  In  general,  it  may  be  said  of  these  two, 
that,  when  the  verb  has  for  its  subject  a  personal  pro- 
noun directly  preceding  it,  it  uses  the  first  form ;  but 
in  other  cases  the  forms  in  s  are  usually  though  not 
invariably  found.  In  consequence,  in  the  Northern 
English  of  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries,  they 
think  and  men  think  would  ordinarily  be  represented 
by  thai  thynk  and  men  thynkes ;  and  this  is  still  a 
peculiarity  of  the  Scotch  dialect. 

209.  It  is  the  Midland  form,  however,  though  largely 
influenced  by  the  Northern,  that  has  been  the  ruHng 
one  in  Modern  English.  The  connective  a  or  ia  of 
the  Anglo-Saxon  had  in  Early  English  become,  in 
all  cases,  e;  and  this  had  reduced  the  inflection  of  ail 
verbs,  whether  weak  or  strong,  to  one  form  so  far  as 
that  was  concerned.     As  regards  the  first  person,  which 


314  English  Language 

in  the  earliest  period  had  dropped  the  personal  ending, 
the  connective  e,  which  in  consequence  had  become 
the  termination,  disappeared  also  from  the  verb  in  the 
Middle  English.  In  this,  the  Northern  dialect  pre- 
ceded the  Midland,  and,  doubdess,  largely  influenced 
it.  This  ending  e  really  disappeared  from  all  verbs  : 
but  it  was  retained  in  the  spelling  of  many,  though 
i.ever  sounded  in  pronunciation,  as  in  /  love  ;  and  this 
has  continued  the  practice  down  to  the  present  time. 
The  Northern  dialect  also  added  s  at  times  to  the  first 
person,  probably  from  a  false  analogy  with  the  other 
persons,  which  all  had  this  ending.  This  occasionally 
appears  in  English  literature  as  late  as  the  sixteenth 
century,  though  in  many  cases  it  is  hard  to  tell  whether 
the  termination  was  due  to  design  or  to  typographical 
errors.  The  colloquial  expressions,  /  says,  thinks  I  to 
myself,  and  others,  are  modern  representatives  of  this 
peculiarity  of  the  Northern  dialect :  though  it  is  notice- 
able, that,  in  nearly  all  such  cases,  the  present  tense  is 
the  historic  present,  and  is  used  to  recount  a  fact  or 
feeling  which  is  already  past ;  and  the  historic  present 
is  not  known  to  the  Anglo-Saxon. 

210.  The  second  person,  through  all  the  periods  of 
English,  outside  of  the  distinctively  Northern  dialect, 
has  invariably  ended  in  st,  and  there  has  never  been  a 
time  when  the  supremacy  of  this  termination  has  been 
seriously  shaken.  During  the  Elizabethan  period  the 
Northern  form  in  s  is  occasionally  found  alongside  of 
it,  as  can  be  seen  in  the  following  instances :  — 


The   Verb.  315 

Thou  art  not  thyself ; 
For  thou  exists  on  many  a  thousand  grains 
That  issue  out  of  dust. 
Shakspeare,  Measure  for  Measure,  act  iii.  scene  I. 

My  sharpness  thou  no  less  disjoints. 

JONSON,  Epigram  58. 

But  in  such  cases  the  final  t  was  almost  always 
dropped,  in  order  to  prevent  the  crowding  together  of 
numerous  consonants,  caused  by  the  previous  dropping 
of  the  connective  e.  In  the  examples  above  given,  the 
full  forms  would  be  exist-e-sf,  disjoint-e-st. 

211.  The  suffix  S  of  the  third  person  singular  was 
in  the  Anglo-Saxon  period  frequently  changed  into  s 
in  the  North  of  England ;  and,  in  the  works  still  ex- 
tant in  the  Northumbrian  dialect,  forms  in  6  and  s 
stand  side  by  side.  By  the  thirteenth  century,  however, 
the  latter  had  completely  supplanted  the  former  in  this 
division  of  Enghsh  speech.  Outside  of  it,  the  ending 
th  was  regularly  employed,  not  only  during  the  Early 
English,  but  during  the  Middle  English  period. 
Chaucer  almost  invariably  has  the  third  person  singular 
terminating  in  th,  except  when  he  designedly  repre- 
sents the  dialect  of  the  North.  The  very  few  instances 
in  which  he  otherwise  has  the  ending  j-  (as  in  "  The 
Boke  of  the  Duchesse,"  line  257)  are  due  to  the 
necessity  of  rhyme.^     But   in   the   sixteenth  century 

1  Instances  occur,  however,  in  which  the  forms  in  s  are  found  where  tha 
recessity  of  rhyme  cannot  be  alleged,  as  in  the  following  extracts  from  Lang- 
lande's  Vision  of  Piers  Plowman  Text  B, 

And  as  his  loresman  leres  hym,  bileueth  and  troweth. 

Passus,  xii,  183. 
Thus  the  poete/r^w«  that  the  pecok  for  his  fctheres  is  reuerenced. 

Passus,  xii;  26a 


3i6  English  Language. 

the  termination  in  s  gradually  made  its  way  from 
the  Northern  dialect  into  the  language  of  literature, 
and,  after  the  middle  of  that  century,  became  with  each 
succeeding  year  more  common.  For  about  a  hun- 
dred years,  the  forms  in  j-  and  th  lasted  side  by  side 
with  apparently  litde  general  difference  in  their  usage. 
Books  and  writers  naturally  varied.  The  authorized 
version  of  the  English  Bible  does  not  employ  the  third 
person  singular  in  s ;  and  in  Bacon's  works  it  is  com- 
paratively infrequent.  Ben  Jonson  does  not  even 
mendon  it  in  his  grammar,  although  it  is  of  constant 
occurrence  in  his  writing.  But,  by  the  middle  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  the  form  in  s  had  become  the 
prevailing  one,  and  has  since  that  time  become  nearly 
the  exclusive  one.  It  is  the  English  Bible  that  has 
kept  alive  the  form  in  th ;  but  it  is  rarely  employed 
now,  save  in  poetry  and  in  the  solemn  style. 

212.  The  Midland  plural  en  is  of  uncertain  origin, 
though  by  some  it  is  regarded  as  being  nothing  more 
than  an  intrusion  of  the  subjunctive  ending  e7i  into 
the  indicative.  To  whatever  due,  it  was  a  distinctive 
characteristic  of  the  Midland  dialect,  and  showed  it- 
self as  early  as  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century.  The 
Southern  speech,  as  has  been  seen,  varied  litde  from 
the  classic  Anglo-Saxon,  and  formed  its  plural  in  eth  ; 
while  the  Northern,  having  often  changed  the  ^5  into 
as  before  the  Norman  conquest,  adopted  after  that 
event  the  form  es  or  s  exclusively,  or  dropped  the  ter- 
mination altogether.  These  three  terminations  of  the 
plural  lasted  side  by  side  for  centuries  j  and,  though 


The   Verb,  317 

strictly  denoting  different  dialects,  they  were  to  some 
extent  interchanged,  and  there  are  but  few  Early  Eng- 
lish  and  even  Middle  English  manuscripts  in  which  at 
least  two  forms  are  not  represented,  though  one  is 
naturally  much  more  common  than  the  other.  It  is 
from  the  form  in  en,  however,  that  the  modern  English 
has  been  derived ;  though  it  is  scarcely  possible  not  to 
believe  that  the  Northern  forms,  existing  as  early  as  the 
thirteenth  century,  without  any  terminations  at  all, 
should  not  have  had  some  influence  in  bringing  about 
the  result  we  now  see.  The  n  began  to  be  widely 
dropped,  even  early  in  the  Middle  EngHsh  period; 
and  this  was  followed  by  e.  This  vowel  naturally  dis- 
appeared first  in  pronunciation,  in  this  as  in  so  many 
other  cases ;  and  its  disuse  in  pronunciation  was  gen- 
erally, though  not  invariably,  followed  by  disuse  in 
orthography.  The  dropping  of  the  «,  and  the  drop- 
ping or  retention  in  the  spelling  of  the  e,  caused  all 
the  persons  of  the  plurals  to  assume  the  same  sound 
and  form  as  the  infinitive  and  the  first  person  of  the 
singular.  It  has  already  been  stated  ^  that,  according  to 
Ben  Jonson,  this  en  was  employed  until  the  time  of 
Henry  VIII.  "But  now,"  he  adds,  "whatever  is  the 
cause,  it  hath  quite  grown  out  of  use,  and  that  other 
so  generally  prevailed,  that  I  dare  not  presume  to  set 
this  afoot  again ;  albeit,  to  tell  you  my  opinion,  I  am 
persuaded  that  the  lack  hereof,  well-considered,  will  be 
found  a  great  blemish  to  our  tongue."  The  termina- 
tion en  is  occasionally  found  through  the  whole  of  the 

1  Page  117. 


3i8  English  Language. 

sixteenth  century ;  but  it  is  entirely  confined  to  poetry. 
In  the  latter  part  of  it,  it  was  made  somewhat  more 
current  in  a  certain  class  of  writings  by  Spenser,  who 
introduced  it  largely,  and  in  this  was  followed  by  a 
number  of  his  admirers  and  imitators.  In  the  seven- 
teenth century  it  disappeared  even  from  literature  of 
this  kind,  though  it  was  and  is  occasionally  revived 
as  an  archaism ;  as,  for  instance,  it  is  employed  fre- 
quendy  in  Thomson's  "  Castle  of  Indolence." 

213.  The  plural  forms  in  s  and  ih  in  reahty  lasted  to 
a  much  later  period  than  the  full  forms  in  en.  In  the 
prose  literature  of  the  sixteenth  century  they  are  far 
from  uncommon,  and  they  can  be  found  even  later,  in 
the  seventeenth.  These  statements  are  especially  true 
of  the  third  person  :  the  first  and  second  with  these 
endings  are  far  from  being  frequent,  though  occasion- 
ally found.  But  there  are  more  than  two  hundred 
plurals  in  s  to  be  found  in  Shakspeare's  plays,  though 
these  are  changed  wherever  possible  in  the  modern 
editions ;  but  doth  and  hath  are  the  only  plurals  in  th 
which  he  regularly  employs.  In  general,  it  may  be  said 
that  the  plurals  in  s  are  common  during  the  whole 
Elizabethan  period ;  but,  by  the  middle  of  the  seven- 
teenth century,  they  had  pretty  generally  gone  out  of 
use.  The  language  of  low  life,  however,  retains  to 
some  extent  this  form  to  the  present  day. 

214.  The  contracted  forms  of  the  present  singular, 
exemplified  by  the  paradigm  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  verb 
ridan  (206),  were  very  common  in  the  earliest  period 
of  our  speech,  much  more  common,  indeed,  than  the 


The   Verb.  319 

fuller,  forms.  They  were,  however,  confined  to  verbs 
whose  stem  ended  in  d,  t,  or  s.  Through  the  whole  of 
the  Early  and  of  the  Middle  English  period  they  are 
constantly  to  be  met  with  in  the  third  person ;  as  rit 
from  7ideth,  sit  from  sitteth,  rist  from  riseth,  glit  from 
glideth,  stant  from  standeth.  By  the  beginning  of  the 
Modern  English  period,  the  full  forms  had  generally 
taken  their  place ;  or  perhaps  it  would  be  better  to 
say  they  were  displaced  by  the  form  in  s.  The  verb 
list,  meaning  'please,'  still  continues  to  show  in  the 
modern  language  the  contracted  form  list,  along  with 
the  full  form  listeth. 

215.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  say,  that,  in  all  the 
early  periods  of  the  language,  there  are  many  variations 
from  the  forms  here  given.  The  connective  e  is  often 
syncopated;  it  is  replaced  often  by  y  or  i ;  the  th  of 
the  endings  frequently  appears  as  t  or  d ;  and  numer- 
ous other  variations  could  be  mentioned  which  need 
here  no  more  than  a  general  reference,  as  they  have 
had  no  influence  upon  the  forms  existing  in  the  modern 
speech. 

216.  The  adoption  of  the  ending  en  by  the  indica- 
tive necessarily  caused  its  plural  to  assume  the  same 
form  as  that  of  the  subjunctive.  The  history  of  the 
one  is  therefore  the  history  of  the  other.  The  disap- 
pearance of  the  n  from  both  took  place  at  the  same 
time,  as  did  also  the  disappearance  of  the  e  when  it 
occurred  at  all.  It  is  only  in  the  second  and  third 
persons  of  the  singular  that  the  subjunctive  forms  differ 
at  all  from  those  of  the  indicative ;  and  it  is  mainly 


320  English  Language, 

owing  to  these  two  moods  assuming  the  same  forms, 
that  the  distinct  shades  of  thought  once  expressed  by 
the  subjunctive,  as  contrasted  with  the  indicative,  have 
practically  disappeared.  To  denote  these  the  language 
is  now  obliged  to  resort  to  other  methods,  the  discus 
sion  of  which  belongs  to  syntax  exclusively. 

THE    PRETERITE    INDICATIVE   AND   SUBJUNCTIVE. 

217.  It  is  the  form  of  the  preterite  which  distin- 
guishes a  verb  of  the  weak  conjugation  from  one  of  the 
strong :  it  is  therefore  desirable  to  give  full  forms  of 
both.  Of  the  Anglo-Saxon  strong  verbs,  the  inflec- 
tion of  the  preterite  of  singan,  '■  to  sing,'  and  tacariy 
'  to  take,'  will  be  given ;  of  the  weak,  the  preterites 
of  deman,  '  to  judge,'  and  lufian,  '  to  love.' 


Sing. 

Indicative. 

Subjunctive. 

Indicative. 

Subjuncti^ 

I.  ic 

sang, 

sung-e, 

toe, 

toc-e, 

2.  pic 

sung-e, 

sung-e, 

toc-e, 

t6c-e, 

3.  he 

sang. 

sung-e. 

toe. 

toc-e. 

PI. 

I.  we 

^ 

2.  ge   ^  sung-on.      sung-en.  toc-on.       toc-en. 

3.  hi 

218.  The  history  of  the  modern  forms  of  the  pret- 
erite has  been  largely  given  in  the  account  of  the 
weak  and  strong  conjugations.  But,  in  addition  to 
what  has  already  been  said,  there  are  three  things  to 
be  especially  noted  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  inflection  :  — 

I.  The  personal  endings  have  entirely  disappeared 
from  the  first  and  third  persons  of  the  singular. 


The   Verb.  321 

2.  The  termination  of  the  second  person  singular 
of  the  indicative  is  not  the  usual  st,  but  e. 

3.  In  the  preterite  of  singaii,  the  vowel  of  the  sec- 
ond person  singular  of  the  indicative  is  different  from 
that  of  the  first  and  third  persons  of  the  same  number  ; 
but  it  is  precisely  the  same  as  the  vowel  of  the  plural 
indicative,  and  both  numbers  of  the  subjunctive. 

The  first  two  statements  were  true  of  all  strong 
verbs  :  the  first  part  of  the  third  was  true  of  about 
four-fifths  of  them. 

219.  These  paradigms  should  be  compared  with 
those  of  the  weak  verbs,  which  follow  :  — 

Sing.  Indicative.  Subjunctive.  Indicative.  Subjunctive. 

1.  ic  dem-de,  dem-de,  luf-o-de,  luf-o-de, 

2.  pii  dem-dest,  dem-de,  luf-odest,  Inf-ode, 

3.  he  dtm-de.  dem-de.  luf-o-de.  luf-o-de. 
P!. 

1.  we  \ 

2.  ge    ^     dem-don.      dem-den.        luf-o-don.      luf-o-den. 

3.  hi  ) 

220.  As  the  history  of  the  subjunctive  is  here,  as  in 
the  present  tense,  involved  in  that  of  the  indicative,  it 
may  be  disregarded ;  and  the  preterite  indicative  of 
the  four  verbs  may  be  placed  side  by  side,  as  they 
appeared  in  Early  English,  with  the  changes,  whatever 
they  are,  that  have  already  been  described  in  the 
account  of  the  conjugations  :  — 

Sing. 

1.  sang,     took,     demede,    lovede, 

2.  sung(e),   took(e),   demedest,   lovedest, 

3.  sang.     took.     demede.    lovede. 
PI. 

I,  2.  3.  sunge(n).  tooke(n).  demede(n).  lovede(n). 


322  English  Language. 

221.  For  the  strong  verbs  these  are  a  theoretically 
correct  inflection,  rather  than  the  ones  invariably  em- 
ployed;  for,  even  in  the  Early  Enghsh  period,  the 
vowels  of  the  singular  and  plural  were  confounded 
(153).  By  the  fourteenth  century,  the  main  distinc- 
tion between  the  singular  and  the  plural  in  the  case 
of  strong  verbs  was,  that  the  latter  added  e  or  en  to 
the  singular  :  the  vowel  difference  was  frequently  dis- 
regarded. In  the  second  person  singular,  the  tendency 
toward  uniformity  began  to  make  itself  felt  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  fourteenth  century ;  and  the  est  or  si 
of  the  weak  conjugation  was,  in  consequence,  substi- 
tuted for  the  e  of  the  strong,  so  that  sunge,  for  illustra- 
tion, became  sa7tg{e)st  or  sung{e)st.  In  the  fifteenth 
century  this  became  the  established  practice.  The 
dropping  of  the  final  en  of  the  plural  resulted,  as  has 
already  been  shown  (153),  in  causing  the  two  num- 
bers to  have  precisely  the  same  form  as  soon  as  there 
ceased  to  be  any  variation  of  vowel. 

222.  In  the  case  of  the  weak  verbs,  the  final  n  was 
frequently  dropped,  even  as  early  as  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury ;  and  this  practice  became  more  and  more  common 
in  the  centuries  which  followed.  By  the  beginning  of 
the  Middle  English  period  it  was  the  usual,  though  not 
invariable,  practice  in  the  Midland  dialect.  At  that 
time,  also,  the  final  e  which  remained  after  the  drop- 
ping of  the  n  was  more  often  neglected  than  retained 
in  the  pronunciation  ;  and  in  the  fifteenth  century  this  e 
disappeared  entirely,  leaving  the  forms  as  they  are  now 
seen.     In  this  stripping  from  the  preterite  plural  the 


The   Verb.  323 

ermination  en,  the  Northern  dialect  had,  as  usual,  taken 
the  lead.  As  early  as  the  thirteenth  century,  it  not 
merely  showed  occasional  instances  of  such  forms  as 
loved  2J\A  demed,  instead  o{  lovede{ii)  and  demede{ii)  : 
they  were  even  then  the  regular  rule. 

223.  Besides  these  two  original  tenses,  English  has 
had  from  the  beginning,  or  has  developed,  certain 
verb-phrases  which  correspond  in  power  and  use  to 
the  tenses  found  in  other  languages  of  the  Indo- 
European  family.  The  primitive  Indo-European  had 
itself  five  tenses ;  and  of  these,  the  imperfect,  the 
future,  and  the  aorist,  were  not  found  in  any  of  the 
earliest  Teutonic  tongues.  Tneir  places,  however, 
have  all  been  supplied  by  compound  forms,  which  it 
\vill  be  best  to  consider  under  the  titles  usually  given 
them,  in  English  grammars. 

THE    FUTURE   TENSE. 

224.  As  the  Anglo-Saxon  had  no  future  tense,  the 
present  was  usually  employed  to  express  the  relation 
denoted  by  it.  This  was  a  peculiarity  shared  by  our 
speech  with  all  the  Teutonic  languages ;  and  in  all  of 
them  it  continues  to  exist  to  the  present  day.  Phrases 
like  ^To-morrow  is  Sunday,'  'I  am  going  to  the  city 
next  week,'  and  numerous  others,  are  common  in 
every  period  of  our  language  and  in  every  great 
writer  of  our  literature.  But  Modern  English  does  not 
use  the  present  for  the  future  by  any  means  as  com- 
monly as  do  several  of  the  other  Teutonic  languages, 
in  particular  the  Modern  High  German. 


324  English  Language. 

225.  But,  even  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  period,  the  ne« 

cessity  for  more  precise  and  definite  expression  was 
beginning  to  be  telt.  The  verbs  sceal,  '  I  am  obliged,' 
'  I  ought,'  and  wyle,  '  I  wish,'  '  I  have  a  mind  to,'  are, 
even  at  that  early  time,  occasionally  found  joined  to 
the  infinitive  of  another  verb  to  express  its  future; 
though,  generally,  and  perhaps  it  is  right  to  say  in- 
variably, there  was,  in  the  employment  of  these,  more 
or  less  reference  to  the  original  idea  of  obligation 
involved  in  the  one,  and  of  inclination  or  intention  in 
the  other.  Still,  in  the  Northumbrian  dialect,  the  idea 
of  simple  futurity  may  be  said  at  times  to  be  distinct- 
ly conveyed,  and  this  certainly  became  the  common 
usage  in  the  Early  English  period.  In  the  sixteenth 
centur)'  a  delicate  distinction  in  the  use  of  the  auxil- 
iaries shall  and  will  began  to  be  prevalent,  and  in  the 
seventeenth  century  was  firmly  established ;  though  this 
statement  is  strictly  true  only  of  England,  and  not  of 
the  Enghsh  spoken  in  Scotland  or  Ireland.  Immigra- 
tion has  largely  broken  down  this  distinction  in  the 
United  States :  the  Irish  do  not  know  it,  and  the 
Germans  do  not  acquire  it. 

FUTURE-PERFECT   TENSE. 

226.  The  future- perfect  was  the  last  of  the  verb- 
phrases  denoting  the  relation  of  time  to  be  formed. 
As  its  name  denotes,  it  is  a  compound  of  the  future 
and  of  the  perfect.  It  was,  consequently,  unknown  to 
the  Anglo-Saxon ;  but  it  likewise,  rarely,  if  ever,  ap- 
peared in  Early  English,  and  it  is  certainly  not  com- 


The    Verb.  325 

mon  before  Modern  E"gl:;h.  Its  use,  indeed,  is  easily 
avoidei.  as  its  place  can  be.  and  often  still  is,  taken 
by  the  compound-perfect,  and  even  sometimes  by  the 
present.  It  was  the  former  of  these  that  was  usually 
employed  during  the  Middle  English  pyeriod.  In  fact, 
the  same  sentence,  involving  the  conception  expressed 
by  this  tense,  has  been  and  can  be  represented  in  a 
vaiiet}"  of  W2;."5,  as  m^y  be  seen  in  the  following  illus- 
trations — 

1.  Le::re  \:.z  ::  ;'■:  ;:::v  viit.  :'-ou  deriest  me  thrice. 

2.  Be:::t  :;.;  :.:.:.::,:;.::  shi!:  deny  me  thrice. 

3.  Be:;:r:/..  ;;:':'.^^  .  i  ::  :e.  :h;  u  shall  deny  me  thrice. 
.1.  Triire  :!.;  i:-:-..^'^  :  .:;-.;  u  ^halt  deny  me  thrice. 
:.   I^:  :rr   :'.;    .:.'::  \\:.-    ;:.     .  .   :    ..:.   :h;u  shalt  have  denied 


r^--t   ;r;vi-ed  tvrice,  thou  shalt  have 


T::e  f.:;:  ::'  these  expressions  is  the  one  employed 
in  A::-:":'-Si  ;::.  :/..  'ast  is  found  only  in  Modern 
E:._.  :-.  '::::.  dDwever,  employs  all  the  rest.  The 
se:::.  :  ::. ;.  d.ird  belong  to  the  Early  Enghsh  period; 
::.=  :':-.:.  i::.i  fifth,  to  the  Middle  English. 

227.  The  penecr  and  pluperfect  are  compound 
tr-irs.  ::r::ied  of  the  past  participle,  ^vith  the  present 
£:  ■  p:r:r:i:e  respectively  of  either  the  verb  be  or  have. 
The  use  of  these  forms  goes  back  to  the  earhest  period 
of  English;  but  the  simple  preterite  was  then  also 
frequently  employed  to  represent  the  idea  expressed 
by  bo:h.     Originally,  the  aiixiliar}-  haie  seems  10  have 


326  English  Language, 

been  joined  only  with  transitive  verbs,  and  he  with 
intransitive ;  but  the  employment  of  the  former  has 
as  steadily  increased  as  that  of  the  latter  has  dimin- 
ished during  the  whole  history  of  our  speech.  Even 
in  Anglo-Saxon,  though  be  was  the  strictly  correct  aux- 
iliary with  verbs  of  motion,  have  can  be  found  joined 
with  them  also,  as,  si^'^an  hie  togcedere  gocgdn  hcef- 
dofi}  (Beowulf,  line  2631)  ;  and  this  has  now  be- 
come far  the  more  common  usage.  The  verb  be  was, 
from  the  beginning,  added  as  an  auxiliary  to  certain 
intransitive  verbs  denoting  motion,  rest,  or  change, 
as,  is  gofie,  is  set,  is  grown,  and  others ;  and  this  has 
maintained  itself  down  to  the  present  time.  But  so 
steady  has  been  the  encroachment  of  have,  that  this 
auxiliary  may  now  be  regarded  as  the  regular  one  to 
form  the  perfect  and  pluperfect  in  Modern  English. 

228.  Besides  these  forms,  there  are  two  other  meth- 
ods of  inflection  that  need  to  be  considered,  —  the  one 
commonly  called  the  progressive  form,  and  the  other 
the  emphatic. 

229.  The  former  of  these  is  compounded  of  the 
tenses  of  the  verb  be  and  of  the  present  participle  of 
another  verb,  as,  /  am  coming,  I  was  covmig.  The 
forms  as  used  with  the  present  and  the  preterite  go 
back  to  the  very  earliest  period  of  the  language,  and 
throughout  the  whole  history  of  our  speech  there  has 
been  but  little  variation  in  the  extent  or  character  of 
their  usage.  They  need,  therefore,  no  remark,  save 
that,  as  compound  tenses  have  been  added  to  the  sub* 

1  After  they  had  gone  together. 


The   Verb.  327 

stantive  verb,  a  full  set  of  corresponding  forms  with 
the  present  participle  have  been  successively  added, 
as,  /  shall  or  will  be  comings  I  have  been  coining,  1 
had  been  comiiig,  and  have  gone  into  general  use. 
Even  the  form  for  the  future-perfect,  /  shall  or  ivill 
have  been  coniing,  is  recognized  in  grammars,  though 
it  is  certainly  rare  in  usage. 

230.  The  history  of  the  so-called  emphatic  forms  is 
far  more  varied.  These  are  compounded  of  the  pres- 
ent and  preterite  of  the  verb  do  with  the  infinitive  of 
another  verb.  These  forms  cannot  be  said  to  have 
come  into  general  use  until  the  early  part  of  the  fif- 
teenth century ;  and  they  were,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
preceded  by  the  infinitive  used  with  the  present,  but 
more  particularly  with  the  preterite  of  the  verb  giri, 
which  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  period  was  rarely  seen 
outside  of  its  compounds,  especially  on-ginnan,  and 
in  later  English  is  rarely  seen  save  in  the  compound 
be-gin.  The  use  of  the  preterite  of  on-ginnan,  with  an 
infinitive  to  express  the  relation  denoted  by  the  pret- 
erite, can  be  traced  back  to  the  Anglo-Saxon;^  but, 
in  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries,  the  infini- 
tive with  the  preterite  of  the  simple  verb  gin  had 
become  exceedingly  common.  Gan  was  strictly  used 
as  the  singular,  and  gu?ine{n)  or  gonne{ii)  as  the 
plural,  as  can  be  seen  in  the  following  lines  from  "  The 
Canterbury  Tales  :  "  — 

It  was  ten  of  the  clokke  \\^  gan  (i.e.,  did)  conclude.  /.  4434* 
Fov  in  a  bath  thay^^««^  (i.e.,  did)  hir  faste  schetten.  /.  12455. 

1  For  illustration  see  the  Anglo-Saxon  poem  of  Elene,  11.  303,  306,  311. 


328  Eftglisk  Language, 

The  use  of  the  present  of  gin  in  this  manner  was  fat 
from  being  as  common  as  that  of  the  preterite  gan ; 
and  this  statement  is  in  the  beginning  true  also  of  do. 

231.  Do  itself,  at  this  period,  when  employed  with 
the  infinitive,  ordinarily  meant  '  to  cause ; '  in  which 
usage  make  has  taken  its  place  in  Modern  English. 
It  is  from  this  causative  sense  that  many  suppose  that 
do  and  did  came  at  last  (o  be  looked  upon  as  having, 
with  the  infinitive,  the  force  of  a  present  and  a  pret- 
erite. '  He  did  arrest  the  man '  would,  in  the  four- 
teenth century,  strictly  have  meant,  Mie  caused  the 
man  to  be  arrested ; '  and  the  transition  from  the 
earher  usage  to  the  modern  does  not  seem  difficult. 
But  it  is  far  more  reasonable  to  attribute  the  rise  of  the 
idiom  to  another  method  of  expression  which  has 
been  common  in  English  during  all  the  periods  of  its 
history.  This  is  the  wide  employment  of  the  present 
and  preterite  of  do  to  supply,  in  a  following  clause,  the 
place  of  the  principal  verb  of  the  preceding  one.  In 
such  a  sentence,  for  instance,  as,  ^  He  thinks  upon 
this  subject  as  I  do,'  the  transition  by  which  the  prin- 
cipal verb  would  be  supplied  in  many  cases  after  do  is 
a  natural  and  an  easy  one.  There  is,  indeed,  but  little 
doubt  that  this  is  the  true  origin  of  the  modern  form. 
As  already  stated,  this  usage  of  do  has  been  common 
during  all  periods  of  English,  and  is  as  frequently  met 
with  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  as  in  any  other. 

232.  But,  whatever  may  be  the  fact  as  to  its  origin, 
this  so-called  emphatic  form  did  not  come  into  gen- 
eral use  till  the  fifteenth  century.     Scattered  instances 


The   Verb.  32^ 

of  its  employment  can  be  found  much  earlier,  extend- 
ing up  even  into  Anglo-Saxon.  In  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury it  was  occasionally  used ;  but  neither  during  that 
nor  the  following  century  can  it  be  said  to  be  at  all 
common :  the  form  for  the  preterite  made  by  com- 
pounding gan  with  the  infinitive  is  in  altogether  wider 
employment.  The  great  writers  who  flourished  at  the 
beginning  of  the  Middle  English  period  —  Chaucer, 
Langlande,  Gower,  and  Wycliffe  —  rarely  made  use 
of  the  forms  of  do  to  express  this  relation.^  But,  with 
their  immediate  successors  at  the  beginning  of  the  fif- 
teenth century,  the  verb,  in  this  usage,  seems  to  have 
become  a  favorite ;  and  from  that  time  the  employ- 
ment of  it  steadily  increased.  It  was  in  the  Eliza- 
bethan era  that  the  use  of  do  and  did  with  the  infini- 
tive, in  declarative  sentences,  was  most  wide-spread. 
In  this  respect,  a  great  change  took  place  during  the 
seventeenth  century,  so  that,  in  such  cases,  the  aux- 
iliary seemed  out  of  place,  unless  used  for  the  specific 
purpose  of  making  the  expression  emphatic.  Pope's 
line,  published  in  1711, — 

While  expletives  their  feeble  aid  do  join, 

1  Do  and  did,  especially  the  latter,  are  common  in  Lydgate's  writings.  In 
the  King's  Quhair,  by  James  I.,  they  occur  in  cantos  iii.  ii,  15;  iv.  18,  27; 
vi.  7.  On  the  other  hand,  the  following  is  the  only  instance  I  have  observed 
in  Langlande,  though  there  may  be  others:  — 

Is  in  drede  to  drenche  that  neuere  dede  swymme. 

Passus,  xii,  169. 

The  form  is  certainly  more  common  in  Robert  of  Gloucester  than  in  either 
Chaucer  or  Langlande,  though  these  two  were  nearly  a  century  later  if 
time  than  he. 


330  English  Language. 

would  have  had  no  special  point  had  it  been  com- 
posed a  century  earlier.  The  language  still  continues 
ordinarily  to  reject  the  do,  and  to  a  less  extent  the 
did,  in  declarative  sentences ;  but  in  negative  and 
inten-ogative  sentences  the  use  of  these  auxiliaries  has 
become  almost  universal.  Men  no  longer  say,  under 
ordinary  circumstances,  Yoic  go  not,  but,  Yott  do  not 
go;  nor,  again,  do  they  say,  Go  you  ?  but,  Do  you  go? 

THE    IMPERATIVE. 

233.  The  imperative  is  found  in  Anglo-Saxon  only 
in  the  second  person  ;  but  it  has  distinct  forms  for  the 
singular  and  the  plural :  that  for  the  latter  is  precisely 
the  same  as  the  plural  of  the  present  indicative,  as  will 
be  seen  in  the  following  examples  of  the  imperative  in 
the  verbs  already  given  :  — ■ 

Sing.     sing.  lufa. 

PL         singaS.  lufiaS. 

The  distinction  between  th&  two  numbers  was  very 
generally  kept  up  until  the  fourteenth  century.  By 
that  time,  however,  not  only  was  the  plural  termina- 
tion ath,  weakened  to  eth,  sometimes  dropped,  but  the 
two  numbers  were  frequently  used  interchangeably  for 
each  other.  This,  no  doubt,  was  largely  due  to  the 
employment  of  the  pronoun  ye  for  addressing  indi- 
viduals (94).  As  difference  of  form  for  the  two  num- 
bers lost,  in  consequence,  its  usefulness,  the  ending  of 
the  plural  went  out  of  use  in  the  fifteenth  century. 

234.  For  the  first  and  third  persons  of  the  impera* 


The   Verb.  33 1 

tive,  the  subjunctive,  followed  generally  by  the  per- 
sonal pronouns,  was  widely  employed  in  Anglo-Saxon  \ 
and  this  usage  has  lasted  down  to  modern  times,  and 
is  found  to  this  day,  at  least  in  poetry.  Return  we  to 
oit7'  subject,  meaning  '  Let  us  return  to  our  subject,'  is 
a  method  of  expression  which  has  been  employed 
from  the  earliest  period  of  our  speech.  The  place  of 
the  first  person  plural  of  the  imperative  was  also  sup- 
plied in  Anglo-Saxon  by  an  infinitive  preceded  by 
uta7i,  which  meant  strictly  of  itself  '  let  us  go.'  This 
went  wholly  out  of  use  within  the  second  century  after 
the  Norman  conquest,  and  the  place  of  both  these 
methods  of  expression  was  wholly  or  mainly  supplied 
by  the  verb  let.  Though  this  made  its  appearance  in 
the  thirteenth  centur}^,  it  can  hardly  be  called  very 
common  even  in  the  fourteenth;  but  it  has  now 
become,  with  an  infinitive  complement,  an  ordinary 
method  of  representing  the  imperative. 

THE   INFINITIVE   AND   PARTICIPLES. 

235.  The  infinitive  was  formed  in  the  primitive  Indo- 
European  by  adding  to  the  verbal  stem  the  suffix  ana, 
which  in  all  the  early  Teutonic  languages  had  dropped 
the  final  a,  and,  becoming  an,  had  been  appended 
directly  to  the  verb  without  any  connective.  Or  per- 
haps it  may  more  properly  be  said  that  it  had  dropped 
the  initial  a  also,  and  that  71  alone  was  the  sign  of  the 
infinitive;  thus  'to  bind'  is,  in  the  Anglo-Saxon 
period,  represented  simply  by  the  form  bi7id-a-n,  made 
up  of  the  root  bind,  the  connective   a,  and   n  the 


332  English  Language, 

infinitive  sign.  In  the  Old  Frisian  and  the  Old  Nors« 
this  final  ;z  had  also  disappeared,  and  the  infinitive 
regularly  terminated  in  a  ;  and,  though  the  West-Saxon 
dialect  clung  firmly  to  an,  the  Northumbrian  showed 
a  constant  and  increasing  tendency  to  follow  the 
Frisian  and  the  Norse  in  giving  up  n  ;  thus  the  infini- 
tive come  is  in  West-Saxon  cuinan ;  in  Northumbrian 
it  is  both  cuman  and  cicma. 

236.  The  weakening  of  the  a^i  to  eti  speedily 
became  universal  after  the  Conquest ;  but,  as  to  the 
retention  or  abandonment  of  the  ;z,  usage  was  exceed- 
ingly variable.  In  fact,  it  remained  for  several  cen- 
turies ;  and  the  Romance  verbs  that  were  brought  into 
the  language  assumed  it  as  naturally  as  they  did  the 
inflections  of  the  tenses.  It  is  not  to  be  understood 
that  it  was  anywhere  in  exclusive  use ;  for  infinitives 
without  n  were  always  just  as  common  as  the  fuller 
form,  if  not  more  so.  In  the  fourteenth  century  the 
disposition  to  drop  this  letter  became  more  pro- 
nounced ;  in  the  fifteenth,  it  had  become  general ;  in 
the  sixteenth,  the  n  was  used  only  for  poetic  effect,  or 
as  a  designed  imitation  of  the  archaic  style.  In  all 
cases  the  final  e  which  was  left  ceased  to  be  sounded  : 
in  some  cases  it  was  dropped  also,  in  other  it  was  re- 
tained. The  latter  was  more  apt  to  take  place  when 
the  connective  was  ia  rather  than  a  ;  as,  for  instance, 
our  word  hate  comes  from  hat-ia-n,  whereas  from 
bind-a-n  we  have  bind,  and  not  binde.  But  the  reten- 
tion of  a  final  e  is  very  arbitrary. 

237.  The  infinitive  is  in  its  nature  a  verbal  noun, 


The   Verb,  /"^     ^^^Z^^v.    ^^^ 

fflTFTVHRSIT' 

and  in  Anglo-Saxon  it  had  a  dative  case,  ending  m 
anne,  invariably  preceded  by  the  preposition  to  ;  as,  td 
bindanne.  This  is  frequently  called  the  gerundial 
infinitive.  The  termination  in  anne  speedily  passed, 
after  the  Conquest,  into  enne  or  ene,  and  at  last,  drop- 
ping the  final  e  entirely,  its  form  became  the  same  as 
that  of  the  root  infinitive,  originally  terminating  in  an. 
One  effect  of  this  unification  of  form  was,  that  the 
infinitive  in  Early  English  assumed  the  preposition  to 
before  it,  except  when  preceded  by  certain  verbs. 
The  use  of  td  with  the  root  infinitive  (as  to  secan, 
Phoenix,  line  275)  is  exceedingly  rare  in  Anglo-Saxon ; 
but  this  has  now  become  so  general,  that,  with  the  dis- 
appearance of  the  ending,  the  preposition  itself  has 
almost  come  to  be  regarded  as  a  part  of  the  infinitive. 
The  gerundial  infinitive  occasionally  preserved  a  dis- 
tinct form  down  to  the  end  of  the  fourteenth  century, 
and  it  was  frequendy  confused  with  the  present  parti- 
ciple in  ende  ;  but,  before  the  beginning  of  the  Modern 
English  period,  it  had  disappeared  from  the  language, 
though  relics  of  its  original  use  continue  to  be  com- 
mon to  this  day  in  such  phrases  as,  "the  house  to  let." 
238.  The  infinitive  of  the  past  to  have  told,  for 
example^  is  not  known  to  the  Anglo-Saxon.  It  origi- 
nated in  the  Early  English  period,  apparently  toward 
its  conclusion,  and  was  frequently  employed  during  the 
Middle  English  and  first  part  of  the  Modern  English 
periods.  Certain  of  its  ancient  uses  there  seems  to 
be  at  present  a  disposition  to  confine  within  narrower 
limits,  if  not  to  reject  altogether. 


334  English  Language. 

239.  The  history  of  the  past  participle  has  already 
been  given  in  the  discussion  of  the  two  conjugations. 
In  both  of  these  the  present  participle  was  formed  the 
same  way ;  that  is,  by  the  adding  of  the  sufifix  cnde  to 
the  radical  syllable,  as,  sing-ejide,  '  singing.'  During 
the  Early  English  period  this  suffix  appeared  fre- 
quently in  the  dialect  of  the  South  as  ind{/),  in  that 
of  the  North  as  and{e) .  In  the  former  it  was,  as  early 
as  the  twelfth  century,  often  confounded  with  the 
gerundial  infinitive  in  enne,  and  also  with  the  verbal 
substantive,  which  in  Anglo-Saxon  ended  usually  in 
ung,  but  sometimes  in  ing.  Of  this  last  termination, 
which  after  the  Norman  conquest  became  the  exclu- 
sive one  for  the  verbal  substantive,  it  finally  assumed 
the  form  in  the  Southern  dialect,  and  from  that  it  was 
adopted  into  the  Midland.  From  the  fourteenth  cen- 
tury i72g  has,  in  consequence,  been  almost  the  exclu- 
sive form  of  the  present  participle,  though  Northern 
forms,  such  as  gUtterand,  followand,  comand,  have 
occasionally  been  employed. 

240.  The  compound  participial  forms  have  all  been 
of  comparatively  later  formation ;  and,  indeed,  the 
use  of  any  of  them  is  one  that  can  easily  be  avoided. 
The  composition  of  deing  with  the  present  participle, 
though  perfectly  legitimate  in  theory,  has  never  been 
common  in  practice.  Expressions  like  being  goi7ig^ 
found  in  Shakspeare's  "Cymbeline  "  (act  iii.  scene  6), 
are  very  rare.  On  the  other  hand,  the  composition  of 
beijig  with  the  past  participle,  as  beijig  loved,  is  now 
vfery  frequent.     These  forms  did  not  become  generally 


The   Verb.  335 

current,  however,  till  the  earlier  part  of  the  sixteenth 
century;  nor  even  then  are  they  often  met  with, 
though  in  this  respect  there  is  great  difference  in 
writers  of  that  time.  It  was  not  until  the  latter  half 
of  that  century  that  the  compounds  of  having  with 
the  past  participle  came  much  into  use.  Necessarily 
the  compounds  with  having  been  were  still  later.  Of 
these,  the  joining  of  this  compound  to  the  past  parti- 
ciple seems  to  have  long  preceded  its  joining  to  the 
present;  that  is  to  say,  such  participial  phrases  as 
having  been  gone  were  earlier,  as  even  now  they  are 
much  more  common,  than  those  represented  by  hav- 
ing been  going.  The  former  were  certainly  in  use  in 
the  latter  half  of  the  sixteenth  century. 

PASSIVE    FORIvIATIONS. 

241.  The  primitive  Indo-European  tongue  had  two 
voices,  —  the  active,  and  the  middle  or  reflexive,  which, 
from  the  very  beginning,  seems  to  have  assumed  the 
functions  of  the  voice  we  call  the  passive.  The  use 
of  the  reflexive  to  do  the  office  of  the  passive  is  com- 
mon enough  in  many  modern  tongues  where  the 
leflexive  pronoun  is  not  united  with  the  verb,  nor 
changed  at  all  in  form  ;  and  how  easy  the  transition  is 
in  sense  can  be  shown  in  our  own  speech  by  many 
familiar  examples.  /  persuade  myself,  for  illustration, 
differs  very  slightly,  and  in  some  cases  not  at  all,  from 
1  am  persuaded.  It  is  from  the  reflexive  that  the 
passive  has  been  developed  in  the  history  of  the  lan- 
guages of  the  Indo-European  family. 


33^  English  Language. 

I6fi,  But  in  the  Teutonic  branch  only  one  of  thes? 
voices  can  be  said  to  exist.  The  Gothic,  indeed,  had 
a  middle  form,  which,  with  some  few  exceptions,  was 
used  in  a  passive  sense ;  but  it  was  only  found  in  the 
present  tense,  and  in  that  the  persons  were  much  con- 
founded ;  and  these  and  other  signs  show,  that,  at  the 
time  of  the  translation  of  the  Bible  by  Ulfilas,  the 
form  was  going  out  of  use.  In  the  other  Teutonic 
tongues,  occasional  traces  of  a  passive,  which  must 
once  have  existed,  can  be  found ;  but  they  are  few  in 
number,  and  slight  in  importance.  In  all  of  the 
earlier  tongues  of  this  class,  the  loss  of  the  form  was 
supplied  by  compounding  the  passive  participle  with 
the  present  and  preterite  of  verbs  corresponding  in 
meaning  to  our  verbs  be  and  become. 

243.  In  the  Anglo-Saxon,  the  participle  was  com- 
pounded with  the  above-named  tenses  of  the  verbs 
beon  and  wesan,  both  meaning  '  to  be,'  and  of  weor- 
\)an,  '  to  become ; '  with  these  the  passive  was  formed. 
The  last  verb  has  now  gone  out  of  use  in  our  tongue  ; 
but  it  existed  as  an  independent  verb  down  to  the 
beginning  of  the  Modern  English  period,  though 
almost  always  in  the  phrase  woe  worth,  meaning  '  woe 
be.'  ^  In  German,  the  corresponding  form  werde?i 
was  chosen  as  the  auxiliary  to  form  the  passive ;  but 
in  English  it  was  never  common  after  the  Anglo-Saxon 


1  "  Thou  cursed  pen,"  quoth  he,  "  woe  worth  the  bird  thee  bare!  " 

Surrey. 
What  will  worth,  what  will  be  the  end  of  this  man? 

Latimer,  Lent  Sermons  (Arber's  reprint,  p.  120X 


The   Verb.  33; 

period,  though  it  is  sometimes  met  with.  The  forma- 
tion of  the  passive  with  the  present  and  preterite  of 
wesan  and  beon  became  early  predominant,  and 
worthe{ii)  gradually  went  out  of  use.  It,  however, 
lasted  down  to  the  end  of  the  fourteenth  century ;  but, 
when  used,  it  had  generally,  and  perhaps  always,  the 
signification  of  a  future;  and  accordingly  it  is  the 
present,  and  not  the  preterite,  that  is  employed,  as 
in  this  extract :  — 

Chastite  withoute  charite  worth  (i.e.  shall  be)  cheyned  in  helle.l 

244.  The  forms  of  worthe{n),  *to  become,'  having 
been  driven  out,  those  of  the  substantive  verb  be  were, 
the  only  ones  left  to  express  the  passive.  It  was,  from 
the  nature  of  things,  an  office  for  which  it  was  ill 
calculated ;  for,  with  a  verb  which  expresses  a  simple 
action,  and  not  a  continuous  state,  the  compounding 
of  its  past  participle  with  the  present  tense  of  be  did 
not  denote  something  actually  taking  place,  but  some- 
thing which  had  taken  place.  The  field  is  reaped 
corresponds  in  form  to  the  ma7i  is  hated ;  but  it  does 
not  correspond  in  the  sense  given  to  the  verbal  phrase. 
With  the  latter  expression  there  is  continuous  action 
implied  ;  in  the  former,  only  a  completed  result.  This 
was  a  difficulty  inherent  in  the  employment  of  this 
form.  To  avoid  it,  the  language  resorted  to  expe- 
dients of  all  kinds  :  it  changed  the  construction  of 
the  sentence,  it  adopted  various  circumlocutions,  and 
at  last,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  century,  it 

1  Langlande's  Piers  Plowman  (text  B) .  —  Passus,  i.  168. 


338  English  Language. 

began  the  formation  of  verb-phrases  made  up  of  the 
present  and  preterite  of  be  and  the  compound  passive 
participle.  The  more  detailed  history  of  the  passive 
formations  in  such  expressions  as  the  field  is  being 
reaped  has  already  been  given  on  pp.  132,  ff,  and  need 
not  be  repeated  here.  As  stated  there,,  the  use  of 
these  forms,  like  that  of  the  emphatic  forms  with  do 
and  did,  is  confined  to  the  present  and  the  preterite 
tense. 

245.  The  discussion  of  the  use  of  the  passive 
belongs  strictly  to  syntax,  and  finds  properly  no  place 
here ;  and  it  is  only  necessary  to  repeat  what  has 
been  previously  said,  that  in  the  freedom  in  which, 
and  in  the  extent  to  which,  the  passive  is  employed, 
English  has  gone  far  beyond  other  cultivated  tongues. 
The  use  of  such  expressions  as  he  was  given  a  book, 
he  was  told  the  truth,  and  the  like,  runs  back  to 
the  Middle  English  period,  and  occurs  in  all  the 
great  writers  of  our  tongue. 

PRETERITE-PRESENT  VERBS. 

246.  In  all  the  early  Teutonic  tongues  there  were  a 
number  of  strong  verbs  whose  preterite  tense  had  as- 
sumed the  signification  of  a  present ;  and  along  with 
this,  and  perhaps  in  consequence  of  it,  the  original 
present  tense^  had  gone  entirely  out  of  use.  A  familiar 
illustration  of  this  assumption  by  a  past  tense  of  a  present 
meaning  can  be  seen  in  the  colloquial  use  in  Modern 
English  of  I  have  got  in  the  sense  of  '  I  have,'  '  I  pos- 
sess.'    The  process,  however,  had  not  stopped  at  the 


The   Verb.  339 

point  indicated  by  this  common  expression.  When 
the  original  present  had  disappeared,  and  the  original 
preterite  had  assumed  entirely  the  signification  of  a 
new  present,  it  went  on  to  develop  a  new  past  tense. 
This  latter  was  always  of  the  weak  conjugation.  So, 
in  the  inflection  of  the  new  present  tense,  the  peculi- 
arities of  the  preterite  of  the  strong  conjugation  are 
found ;  while  in  the  new  preterite  the  inflection  is 
the  one  which  regularly  characterizes  the  weak  verbs. 

247.  In  Anglo-Saxon  there  were  twelve  of  these 
verbs,  of  which  seven  continue  to  exist  in  some  form, 
or  to  some  extent,  in  Modern  English.  As  each  has 
had  a  history  of  its  own,  each  will  necessarily  be 
treated  of  by  itself,  so  far  as  the  changes  which  it  has 
undergone  have  not  already  been  treated  of  in  the 
account  given  of  the  inflection  of  the  verb  in  the  pre- 
vious pages.  Only  the  forms  of  the  present  and  the 
preterite  indicative  are  here  laid  down ;  for  the  sub- 
junctive has  nothing  about  its  histoiy  different  from 
that  of  others  verbs,  and  the  other  parts  are  developed 
in  some  of  these  verbs,  and  absent  in  others. 

Cunnan. 

248.  The  verb  which  has  developed  this  new  infini- 
tive originally  belonged  to  the  second  class  of  strong 
verbs  (143).  The  following  is  the  Anglo-Saxon  in« 
flection :  — 


340  English  Language, 


Sing.    Present. 

Preterite. 

I.  can,  can^ 

cii6e,  could. 

2.  cunne,  canst, 

cuSest, 

3.  can. 

cu«e. 

PI. 

2,  3.  cunnon. 

ciit5on. 

249.  It  will  be  seen,  that,  even  in  the  Anglo-Saxon, 
the  weak  termination  of  the  second  person,  canst,  was 
taking  the  place  of  the  regular  strong  form,  cunne, 
which  is,  indeed,  looked  upon  by  many  as  never  being 
used  save  in  the  subjunctive.  Early  and  Middle  Eng- 
lish showed  for  the  preterite  couthe  and  coude,  the 
latter  of  which  became  the  prevaihng  form  in  Modern 
English.  In  the  sixteenth  century  an  /  was  inserted, 
by  a  false  analogy  with  would  and  should ;  but  it  has 
never  been  pronounced.  The  verb  never  had  a  pres- 
ent participle,  and  its  past,  cM,  has  gone  out  of  use 
though,  as  an  adjective,  it  survives  in  the  last  syllable 
of  un-couth.  The  infinitive  has  also  disappeared,  save 
as  it  still  survives  in  the  independent  verb  con :  it  was 
common,  however,  in  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  cen- 
turies, in  the  sense  of '  to  be  able.' 

Durran. 

250.  This  belonged  to  the  same  strong  class  as  the 
preceding. 

Sing.     Present.  Preterite. 

1.  dear,  dare^  dorste,  durst, 

2.  dearst,  dorsted, 

3.  dear.  dorste. 
PI. 

I,  2,  3.  durron.  dorston. 


The    Vej'b.  341 

251.  In  this  verb  the  original  form  durre,  of  the 
second  person,  seems  to  have  been  entirely  supplanted 
by  dearst,  even  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  period.  As  the 
existing  present  is  in  its  origin  a  preterite,  the  third 
person  of  the  singular  is  precisely  the  same  as  the 
first;  but  the  tendency  to  make  it  conform  to  the 
regular  inflection,  and  form  its  third  person  in  s,  has 
been  powerful  since  the  beginning  of  Modern  English. 
Both  forms,  he  dare  and  he  dares,  have  flourished  side 
by  side  during  the  last  three  centuries.  The  verb, 
however,  shows  a  disposition  to  go  over  entirely  to  the 
regular  form  of  the  weak  conjugation,  and  even  to 
discard  the  preterite  durst,  which  is  now  far  less  com 
mon  than  formerly.  Throughout  all  its  forms  it  is 
now,  indeed,  frequently  inflected  regularly,  and  has 
developed  all  the  parts  of  the  verbs. 

Sculaii. 
1^1,  This  belonged  to  Class  III.  of  the  strong  verbs 
(144).  ' 


Sing. 

Present. 

Preterite. 

I. 

sceal,  shall^ 

sceolde,  should^ 

2. 

scealt, 

sceoldest, 

3- 

sceal. 

sceolde. 

PI. 

;.  2.  3. 

sculon 

sceoldon. 

253.  In  Anglo-Saxon,  ic  sceal  meant  ordinarily  *I 
am  under  obligation,'  '  I  ought,'  '  I  must.'  Its  trans- 
ition to  express  the  future  has  already  been  pomted 
out  in  the  account  of  that  tense.     It  has  remained 


342  English  Language, 

throughout  its  history,  comparatively  speaking,  faithfui 
to  the  Anglo-Saxon  form ;  and  the  distinction  between 
the  vowel  of  the  singular  and  of  the  plural  was  kept  up, 
at  least  by  some  writers,  as  late  as  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury. In  fact,  this  verb  preserved  this  distinction  after 
most  of  the  other  strong  preterites  had  abandoned  it ; 
shal  and  shulieii)  being,  in  the  fourteenth  century, 
the  respective  methods  usually  found  of  denoting  the 
singular  and  the  plural. 

Mdgan. 
254.  This  also  belonged  to  Class  III.  of  the  strong 


verbs 

(144) 

Sing.        Present. 

I. 

msg,  may, 

meaht,  ) 
miht,     ) 

2. 

3- 

maeg. 

I.  2.  3. 

msbgon. 

Preterite. 

meahte, 

mihte, 

meahtest, 

mihtest, 

meahte, 

mihte. 

meahton, 

mihton. 


kht 


The  second  person  singular  of  the  present  thou 
might  lasted  down  even  to  the  Middle  English  period, 
and  was  not  entirely  supplanted  by  mayst  until  the  fif- 
teenth century. 

Motan, 

255.  This  verb  belonged  to  Class  IV.  of  the  strong 
verbs  (146). 


The   Verb.  343 

Sing.    Present.  Preterite. 

1.  mot,  mote^  moste,  must^ 

2.  most,  mostest, 

3.  mot.  moste. 
PI. 

I,  2,  3.  moton.  m6ston. 

256.  This  verb  has  had  a  history  different  from  most 
of  the  others,  in  that  its  strong  preterite-present  has 
practically  disappeared  from  Modern  English,-  and  its 
new  weak  preterite  has  come  to  assume  the  force  of  a 
present ;  and,  to  supply  the  place  of  a  new  preterite  to 
must,  the  language  has  had  recourse  to  was  obliged. 
The  original  mote  is  occasionally  heard ;  but  it  is 
limited  to  a  few  phrases,  or  to  imitation  of  the  archaic 
style. 

Agan. 

257.  This  has  given  rise  to  both  a  defective  and  a 
regular  weak  verb  in  Modern  English.  The  defective 
verb  ought  is  in  its  origin  the  new  weak  preterite  of  a 
preterite-present  verb;  and  its  relations  can  only  be 
comprehended  clearly  by  examining  the  original  forms. 
The  verb  from  which  it  came  telonged  to  Class  V.  of 
the  strong  conjugation  (147). 


Sing.     Present. 

Preterite. 

I.  ah,  I  own 

possess^ 

ahte,  ouglt^ 

2.  iht,  ahst, 

ahtest, 

3.  ah. 

ahte. 

PI. 

I.  2.  3.  agon. 

ahton. 

258.  By  comparing  the   Anglo-Saxon  forms   with 
those  of  its  class,  it  will  be  seen,  that,  even  in  the 


344  English  Language. 

earliest  period,  this  verb  had  deviated  from  the  regulai 
inflection ;  for  the  vowel  of  the  plural  had  become  the 
same  as  the  singular,  and  we  have  dgo?i  instead  of  igo?i. 
The  present  forms  were  in  use  in  the  Early  English 
period,  but  were  gradually  supplanted  by  the  preterite  ; 
while  from  the  infinitive  the  word  owe  came  into  use, 
and,  after  having  for  a  while  ought  as  its  preterite, 
developed  the  regular  form  owed.  This  left  ought  to 
be  used  exclusively  in  the  sense  of  duty,  obligation, 
fitness,  and  it  is  now  confined  to  this  one  signification 
and  tense. 

Wita7i. 

259.  This  verb,  whose  forms  have  been  much  mis- 
understood, belonged,  also,  to  Class  V.  of  the  strong 
conjugation  (147).  All  difficulties  connected  with  it 
disappear  at  once  on  an  examination  of  the  original 
form  :  — 

Sing.     Present.  Preterite. 

1.  vvat,  woty  wiste,  zuisty 

2.  wast,  wistest, 

3.  wat.  wiste. 
PI. 

I.  2.  3.  witon.  wiston. 

260.  The  infinitive  of  this  verb  to  wit  still  exists  in 
Modern  English,  especially  in  legal  phraseology,  used 
in  the  adverbial  sense  of  '  namely.'  Another  form  of 
this,  to  weet,  is  occasionally  found  in  our  earlier  poetry. 
The  present  and  preterite  are  still  retained,  mainly 
through  their  occurrence  in  the  Bible.  The  singular 
form  wot  of  the  present,  and  the  plural  present  witen 


The   Verb.  34S 

or  wite^  lasted  down  to  the  fifteenth  century ;  but,  aftei 
that,  wot  was  generally  used  of  both  numbers.  Very 
curiously  a  singular  blunder  produced  a  new  verb  as  the 
supposed  present  of  wiste.  It  has  already  been  stated 
that  the  Anglo-Saxon  prefix  ge  was  turned,  in  Early  and 
Middle  English,  into  y  or  i  (201).  The  Anglo-Saxon 
adjective  gewis{s), '  certain,'  became  in  Early  and  Mid- 
dle English  the  adverb  iwis,  or  ywis,  '  certainly.'  In 
the  sixteenth  century  this  was  frequendy  printed  Iwis, 
and,  in  consequence,  the  capital  /  was  supposed  to  be 
the  personal  pronoun,  instead  of  the  modern  repre- 
sentative of  the  prefix  ge ;  and  wis  was  accordingly 
assumed  to  be  a  verb,  and  regarded  as  the  present  of 
wisfe.  Wis  has  rarely,  if  ever,  been  used  outside  of 
the  phrase  Iwis,  which  is,  however,  by  no  means  un- 
common in  poetry,  even  in  our  own  day.  A  verb  wis, 
or  wiss  —  from  Anglo-Saxon  wissian,  'to  show,'  'to 
instruct'  —  died  out  in  the  Middle  English  period,  and 
has  no  connection  with  the  present  word.  There  are 
numerous  anomalous  forms  of  the  verb  wit  to  be 
met  with  in  Modern  English,  such  as,  he  woteth  for  he 
wot,  the  participle  wotting  for  witting  (seen  in  un- 
witting), and  others;  but  they  are  all  explainable  as 
formed  on  false  analogies  with  other  verbs,  or  misun- 
derstanding of  the  character  of  this  one. 

261.  To  this  list  of  preterite-present  verbs  of  the 
early  language  that  still  survive,  in  some  form,  to  our 
day,  may  be  added  one,  which,  even  in  its  original 
form,  presents  great  irregularities.  This  is  willan,  one 
of  the  auxiliaries  now  used  by  us  to  express  the  future. 


346  English  Lajiguage. 

Willan. 

This  belonged  to  Class  V.  of  the  strong  verbs  (147). 
It  was  originally  a  subjunctive  of  the  preterite,  but 
had  discarded  some  of  the  forms  belonging  to  the  sub- 
junctive, and  taken  those  of  the  indicative  in  their 
place  :  — 

Sing.      Present.  Preterite. 

1.  wille,  will^  wolde,  wouldy 

2.  wilt,  woldest, 

3.  wille.  wolde. 
PL 

I.  2.  3.  willa3.  woldon. 

262.  In  Early  English,  forms  of  the  present  with  o 
instead  of  i  were  common,  and  wol  and  wil  stood  side 
by  side  until  the  fifteenth  century.  Indeed,  a  relic  of 
the  former  is  still  preserved  in  the  colloquial  form 
won't,  which  is  a  contraction  of  wol  ?toi,  which  itself 
was  sometimes  written  as  zaonot. 

263.  Apparently,  by  analogy  with  the  preterite- 
present  verbs,  the  verb  tieed  frequently  drops  the  i-  of 
the  third  person  singular  of  the  present  tense  when 
followed  by  the  infinitive  of  another  verb ;  and  '  he 
need  not  do  it,'  for  instance,  would,  perhaps,  be  re- 
garded as  more  common  than  'he  needs  not  do  it.' 
This  usage  certainly  goes  back  to  the  beginning  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  and  is  perhaps  earher. 

IRREGULAR  VERBS. 

264.  Beside  the  preterite -present  verbs,  there  are 
three  which  deserve  special  mention.     One  of  these  is 


The   Verb.  347 

the  verb  do,  which  still  exhibits  the  peculiarity  of  that 
primitive  reduplication  by  which  the  preterite  was 
originally  denoted.  The  modern  forms  exhibit  little 
variation  from  the  Anglo-Saxon  dd7i,  dide,  don,  except 
that,  in  the  present  singular,  they  have  abandoned  the 
vowel-variation  of  the  second  and  third  persons.  The 
original  forms  for  that  number  were  do,  dest,  de^,  and 
the  plural  do'^. 

265.  The  verb  go,  both  in  the  earliest  and  latest 
periods,  has  supplied  its  preterite  by  one  taken  from 
another  stem.  In  Anglo-Saxon,  while  it  had  the  form 
gedng  for  the  preterite,  it  more  commonly  made  use  of 
code,  and  this  appeared  as  the  usual  preterite  in  Early 
and  Middle  English,  with  the  spelling  yode.  There 
was  also  another  Anglo-Saxon  verb,  wendan,  '■  to  go,' 
which  in  Early  English  was  inflected  wenden,  wende, 
went ;  and  to  this  the  compound  tenses  I  have  went, 
J  had  went,  frequently  met  with  in  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury, belong.  When,  in  the  fifteenth  century,  yode  was 
given  up,  the  preterite  wende,  contracted  into  7iuent, 
came  to  take  its  place  as  the  preterite  of  go ;  the 
participle  weiit  disappeared;  and  the  verb  wetiden, 
which  had  now  become  wend  by  the  dropping  of  the 
final  en,  developed  the  regular  form  wended. 

266.  Finally,  there  remains  the  substantive  verb,  in 
which  the  roots  of  several  verbs  have  been  and  still 
are  represented.  The  following  are  the  forms  of  the 
present  tense,  in  both  the  indicative  and  subjunctive, 
in  the  West-Saxon  dialect  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  ; — 


34^  English  Language. 


Sing.    Indie. 

Subj. 

Indie. 

Subj. 

I.  eom, 

si, 

be6(m), 

beo, 

2.  eart, 

si, 

bist, 

beo, 

3.  is. 

si. 

biS. 

beo. 

PI. 

2.  3.  sind,  sindon. 

sin. 

be6t5. 

beon 

267.  The  subjunctive  form  si  did  not  last  beyond 
the  Anglo-Saxon  period,  nor  did  the  plural  sind,  or 
sindon;  but  the  singular  indicative  forms,  eom,  eart, 
is,  have  been  preserved,  with  litde  change,  through  all 
the  periods  of  the  language.  In  the  Northumbrian 
dialect  of  Anglo-Saxon  appeared  also,  as  the  plural  of 
the  present  indicative,  the  form  aron,  the  ancestor  of 
the  present  form  are.  It  has  also  been  pointed  out,  in 
two  instances,  in  early  West-Saxon  poetry ;  but  it  was 
from  the  Northern  dialect,  aided  by  its  exclusive  use  in 
the  language  of  the  Scandinavian  invaders  of  England, 
that  we  owe  its  general  adoption  into  our  tongue.  Even 
in  the  beginning  of  the  Middle  English  period,  are  was 
far  from  common  in  the  Midland  and  Southern  dia- 
lects. Chaucer  almost  invariably  uses  be  or  ben  as 
the  plural  of  the  present;  and  the  same  remark  is 
Irue  of  Langlande,  though  are  is  more  common  with 
him  than  with  Chaucer.  The  Northern  writers,  how-" 
ever,  use  are  regularly,  and  from  them  the  practice 
extended,  in  the  fifteenth  century,  to  all.  Be,  how- 
ever, was  constantly  used  as  an  indicative  form,  down 
to  the  seventeenth  century,  and  even  later,  and  is 
still  occasionally  employed  in  poetry,  especially  in 
the  phrase,  there  be.     The  tendency  showed  itself,  in 


The   Verb,  349 

the  sixteenth  century,  to  limit  the  verb  he  to  the  sub- 
junctive, and  this  has  now  become  the  estabhshed 
general  rule. 

268.  The  preterite  is  from  an  obsolete  strong  verb, 
wesan,  of  Class  III.  (144),  meaning 'to  dwell,'  'to 
exist,'  and  was  thus  inflected  :  — 


Sing.  Indicative 

Subjunctive. 

I.  wa:s, 

waere, 

2.  wsere, 

wsere, 

3.  vvaes. 

waere. 

PI. 

,  2,  3.  wseron. 

wseren. 

269.  This  is  the  only  verb  existing  in  Modern  Eng- 
lish in  which  the  original  rhotaclsm  has  been  preserved. 
In  addition  to  the  retention  of  the  change  of  s  into  r, 
this  preterite  also  shows  vowel  variation  between  the 
singular  and  the  plural. 

270.  These  forms  have  remained  substantially  un- 
changed during  all  the  periods  of  English  language, 
subject  only  to  the  droppings  of  endings  that  have 
taken  place  in  the  case  of  the  other  verbs.  An  excep- 
tion is  to  be  made  in  the  case  of  the  second  person 
singular,  which  is  strictly  were ;  and,  in  fact,  thou 
were  has  been  always  in  use  in  poetry.  But  the 
abandonment  of  vowel-change  in  the  second  person 
of  the  preterite  of  strong  verbs  naturally  led  to  the 
disuse  of  this  form.  In  the  Early  English  period  the 
modern  inflection  wast  showed  itself;  and  wast  and 


350  English  Language. 

were  lasted  side  by  side  for  several  centuries,  the 
former  coming  steadily  more  and  more  into  use,  and 
gradually  displacing  the  latter  from  the  language  of 
prose.  But  along  with  these  a  new  form,  wert,  was 
developed,  somewhat  after  the  analogy  of  shal-t  and 
wilt-i,  the  final  t,  in  fact,  being  an  older  suffix  for  the 
second  person  than  the  usual  st.  Wert  does  not  seem 
to  have  been  common  before  the  sixteenth  century,  if 
it  even  be  known  at  all ;  and  it  was  often  falsely  spoken 
of  as  belonging  to  the  subjunctive.  Like  were,  it  is 
now  mainly  confined  to  poetry ;  but  this  may  be  due 
to  the  fact  that  the  second  person  itself  of  the  verb  is 
little  used  in  prose.  *, 

271.  The  infinitive  wesan,  with  the  imperative 
and  participle,  early  disappeared,  and,  as  they  have 
had  no  influence  on  the  later  language,  need  not  be 
mentioned  here.  Our  present  infinitive,  imperative, 
and  participles  are  all  derived  from  the  Anglo-Saxon 
deojt. 

272.  It  is  to  be  added,  that,  in  some  of  the  Northern 
dialects,  is  was  early  used  for  all  persons  of  the  present 
singular  and  plural,  and  was  for  the  same  numbers  and 
persons  of  the  preterite.  From  the  North,  is  has  some- 
times made  its  way  into  the  literary  language  ;  but  its 
use  has  been  comparatively  rare.  The  employment  of 
was  as  a  plural  has  been  on  a  much  more  extensive 
scale ;  and  in  the  eighteenth  century,  even,  the  pret- 
erite is  sometimes  inflected  with  was  as  the  regular 
plural,  instead  of  were.  This  is  more  especially  true 
of  the  second  person,  which  is  often  you  was.     Cases 


The   Verb.  351 

of  its  employment  in  the  first  and  third  persons  are 
much  more  infrequent. 

With  the  verb  ends  the  foregoing  brief  consideration 
of  the  changes  that  have  taken  place  in  the  inflection  of 
English.  As  a  result  of  this  consideration,  a  few  gene- 
ral inferences  can  be  safely  drawn.  One  of  them  is, 
that  the  history  of  language,  when  looked  at  from  the 
purely  grammatical  point  of  view,  is  little  else  than 
the  history  of  corruptions.  The  account  contained  in 
the  preceding  pages  is  largely  a  record  of  endings  that 
have  been  dropped,  or  perverted  from  their  proper 
use ;  of  declensions  that  have  been  intermixed ;  of 
conjugations  that  have  been  confounded;  of  inflec- 
tions in  every  part  of  speech  that  have  either  passed 
away  altogether,  or  have  been  confused  with  one  an- 
other, and  consequently  misapplied.  There  are  but 
few  forms  in  use,  which,  judged  by  a  standard  once 
existing,  would  not  be  regarded  as  gross  barbarisms. 
Terminations  and  expressions  which  had  their  origin 
in  ignorance  or  misapprehension  are  now  accepted  by 
all ;  and  the  employment  of  what  was  at  first  a  blun- 
der has  often  become  subsequently  a  test  of  propriety 
of  speech. 

Nothing  of  this  need  be  denied  or  even  ques- 
tioned :  all  of  it  may  be  ungrudgingly  admitted.  But 
it  is  equally  true  that  these  gram.matical  changes,  or 
corruptions  if  one  is  disposed  so  to  call  them,  have 
had  no  injurious  e-flects  upon  the  development  ot  the 
language;  or  if,  in  single  instances,  they  Vzvo.  been 


352  English  Language. 

followed  by  injurious  effects,  these  have  been  more 
than  counter-balanced  by  benefits  which  have  been 
derived  from  other  quarters ;  for  the  operation  of 
these  changes  is  merely  on  the  outside.  It  is  rare, 
indeed,  that  they  impair,  or  even  modify  in  the  slight- 
est, die  real  force  of  expression.  It  would  now  be 
looked  upon  as  improper  to  say  /  have  shook  for  / 
have  shaken  ;  yet,  in  the  days  of  Shakspeare  and  Mil- 
ton, the  former  was  as  allowable  as  the  latter :  and  at 
this  time  all  of  us  use  the  preterite  for  the  past  parti- 
ciple in  a  similar  way  in  I  have  stood,  or  I  have  ujide?-- 
stood,  and  are  not  even  conscious  in  so  doing  that  we 
are  guilty  of  what  is,  in  strict  grammar,  a  barbarism. 
Changes  of  such  a  character  —  and  most  changes  are 
of  this  character  —  affect  merely  the  garb  of  speech, 
not  speech  itself.  To  suppose  that  the  English  tongue 
has  suffered  any  loss  of  strength,  that  it  has  entered 
upon  a  period  of  decline,  because  we  now  say,  for 
instance,  stood,  where  etymologically  we  ought  to  say 
stonden,  is  no  evidence  whatever  of  decay  on  its  part : 
it  is  merely  evidence  of  ignorance  on  our  part  of  what 
constitutes  the  real  hfe  of  language.  It  is,  at  the  pres- 
ent time,  a  fashion  to  talk  of  our  speech  as  being  in 
some  way  less  pure  and  vigorous  than  it  was  in  the 
days  of  Alfred ;  mainly,  because  then  it  had,  on  the 
one  hand,  fewer  foreign  words,  and,  on  the  other,  more 
inflections,  more  formative  affixes,  and  therefore  more 
capacity  for  self-development.  But  the  test  of  the 
value  of  any  tongue  is  not  the  grammatical  or  lin- 
guistic resources  which  it  may  be  supposed  to  possess, 


The   Verb.  353 

It  is  the  use  which  it  makes  of  the  resources  it  does 
possess.  It  is,  on  the  very  face,  an  absurdity  to  speak 
of  a  form  of  a  language  which  has  been  made  the 
vehicle  of  one  of  the  great  literatures  of  the  world, 
which  has  been  found  fully  adequate  to  convey  all  the 
conceptions  of  generations  of  illustrious  men,  as  being 
inferior  in  power  to  a  form  of  it,  which,  whatever  its 
theoretical  capacities,  has  embodied  in  its  literature, 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  little  that  is  worth  reading  or 
remembering.  As  a  mere  instrument  of  expression, 
there  is  not  the  slightest  question  as  to  the  immense 
superiority  of  the  English  of  the  nineteenth  century 
over  that  of  the  ninth.  It  is "  equally  proper  to  say 
that  the  former  is  just  as  pure  as  the  latter,  unless  we 
restrict  that  epithet,  as  applied  to  language,  to  the 
narrow  sense  of  being  free  from  words  that  are  not  of 
native  origin.  Even  in  this  respect  there  was  no 
difference  in  the  influences  that  operated  upon  the 
two  forms  of  the  speech ;  for  the  disposition  to  use 
foreign  terms  was  just  as  potent  in  the  Anglo-Saxon 
period  as  now,  though  the  necessity  for  them  was 
naturally  far  less  pressing.  No  tongue  can  possibly 
be  corrupted  by  alien  words  which  convey  ideas  that 
cannot  be  expressed  by  native  ones.  Yet  this  elemen- 
tary truth  is  far  from  being  universally  accepted ;  for 
it  ig  a  lesson  which  many  learn  with  difficulty,  and 
some  never  learn  at  all,  that  purism  is  not  purity. 

The  third  inference  concerns  the  assurance  we  may 
feel  as  to  the  stability  of  our  speech  derived  from  the 
influence,  already  immense  and  steadily  increasing,  of 


354  English  Language. 

the  language  of  literature.  This  is  something  that 
places  tongues  now  in  use  in  a  position  entirely  differ- 
ent from  that  occupied  by  those  employed  in  any  previ- 
ous period  in  the  history  of  the  world.  The  cultivated 
speech  is  with  us  no  longer  confined  to  a  small  class 
which  an  irruption  of  barbarism,  or  a  social  and  politi- 
cal revolution,  may  subject  to  the  sway  of  those  who 
speak  a  foreign  or  a  corrupt  idiom.  It  is  the  language 
of  entire  communities,  and,  through  the  operation  of 
manifold  agencies,  is  daily  growing  in  universahty  and 
power.  The  whole  tremendous  machinery  of  educa- 
tion is  constantly  at  work  to  strengthen  it,  to  broaden 
it,  to  bring  into  conformity  with  it  the  speech  of  the 
humblest  as  well  as  of  the  highest.  Day  by  day  dia- 
lectic differences  disappear ;  day  by  day  the  standard 
tongue,  in  which  is  embodied  classical  English  litera- 
ture, is  widening  and  deepening  its  hold  upon  every 
class.  The  history  here  given,  brief  as  it  is,  shows 
how  violent  and  extensive  have  been  the  changes  that 
have  taken  place  in  our  inflection  since  the  ninth 
century ;  and  yet,  of  those  changes,  how  few  in  num- 
ber and  slight  in  importance  are  such  as  belong  to 
the  last  three  hundred  years.  If  the  social  and 
political  agencies  now  in  being  continue  to  exist,  we 
may  confidently  expect  that  the  language  of  the  future 
will  never  materially  vary  from  what  it  is  to-day. 
Movement  there  will  be  :  differences  will  be  devel- 
oped, but  they  will  not  be  important  either  in  their 
nature  or  extent.  Pronunciation  will  probably  be 
most  affected;  but  words  and  their  meanings,  gram- 


The   Verb,  355 

matical  inflections  and  constructions,  will  never,  on 
any  large  scale,  move  away  from  usage  which  a  great 
literature  has  made  more  or  less  familiar  to  all,  and 
to  the  readers  and  students  and  creators  of  which 
every  generation  adds  a  constantly  increasing  number. 
English,  in  the  form  which  it  has  had  essentially  for 
the  last  three  hundred  years,  may  doubtless  disappear ; 
but  its  destruction,  if  it  ever  takes  place,  will  be  under 
conditions  such  as  have  never  before  existed,  and  will 
be  owing  to  agencies  which  differ  wholly  from  those 
that  have  brought  about  the  ruin  of  any  of  the  great 
cultivated  languages  of  the  past. 


INDEX  OF  WORDS  AND  PHRASES. 


Abbreviations.  —  Adj.,  adjective;  adv.,  adverb;  «r2f.,  article;  corn- 
far.,  comparative  degree;  cojnp.  part.,  compound  participle;  dcfcc,  defec- 
tive; o'rw^w.,  demonstrati/e;  z'w/^r.,  impersonal;  /;;</(/.,  indefinite;  z';/y/f., 
indicative  mood;  infiii.,  infinitive;  iiitcrj.,  interjection;  intcrro^.,  inter- 
rogative; zV;'^'^.,  irregular;  n.,  noun;  num.,  numeral;  /. /.,  passive  parti- 
ciple; p.pres.,  present  participle;  //.,  plural  number;  per.,  person;  pers., 
personal;  pass.,  possessive;  prep,,  preposition;  pres.,  present  tense;  prct., 
preterite  tense;  pron.,  pronoun;  v.,  verb;  v.  prct.-pres.,  preterite-preserit 
verb;  v.  s.,  strong  verb;  v.  vj.,  weak  verb;  v.  s.  (?'.  «'.),  strong  verb  origi- 
nally weak;  v.  w.  {v.  s.),  weak  verb  originally  strong;  t'.  iu.,  v.  s.,  weak 
verb  originally  strong,  and  still  possessing  some  strong  forms. 


A,  pf'on.  pers.,  218. 

A,  prep,,  133. 

Abide,  v.  s.,  268,  275,  278,  285. 

Abidden,  /.  p.  from  adi'de,  278, 

285. 
Ache,  V.  zu.  {v.  s  ),  249. 
Agan,  z>.  pret.-pres.,  343. 
Aged,  adj..,  292. 
Ah,  V.  pret.-pres.,  343. 
Aid,  adj.,  202. 
An,  art ,  237. 
An,  man.,  237. 
An,  profi.  indef.,  237. 
Apparatus,  ft.,  192. 
Are,  V.  irreg.,  38,  348. 
Aron,  V.  irreg.,  348. 
Ashes,  n.,  180. 
Ass,  n.,  180. 
Asschen,  ii.,  180. 
Assen,  ;/.,//.  of  ass,  180. 

Bad,  adj.,  205. 
Badder,  adj.,  205. 


Baddesi",  adj.,  205. 

Bake,  v.  to.  {v.  s.),  249. 

Baken,  p.  p.  from  bake,  251. 

Ban,  2).  7i>.  {7'.  s.},  248. 

Band,  7Z.,  159. 

Bard,  ;/.,  31. 

l]3.re,  pret.  from  bear,  280. 

Bark,  v.  w.  {v.  s.),  248. 

Basket,  ;/.,  31. 

Be,  V.  irreg,  132,  159,  325,  326, 

3V,  336,  337,  33^»  34S,  349» 

350. 
Bear,  v.  s.,  257,  266,  279,  286. 
Beat,  V.  s.,  263,  284. 
Beatan,  v.  s.,  263. 
Become,  zk  s.,  336. 
Bee,  ;/.,  180. 
Been,  ii.,pl.  of  bee,  180. 
Begen,  man.,  215. 
Begin,  e/.  J.,  159,  273,  275,327. 
Begonne,  /.  p.  from  begin,  283. 
Begunnen,/'./.  from  begin,  283, 
Being  going,  co7np.  part.,  334. 

357 


358  Index  of  Words  and  Phrases, 


Being  loved,  comp.  part.,  334. 
Bellow,  V.  w.  {v.  s-.),  248. 
Ben,  from  be,  v.  irreg.,  348. 
Bend,  v.  w.,  299. 
Beon,  V.  irreg.,  132,  336,  337, 

348,  350- 
Beorg,  «.,  34. 
Bequeathe,   v.  w.    {v.  s.),   249, 

267. 
Beran,  v.  s.,  266,  279. 
Bernan,  v.  w.,  289. 
Beseech,  v.  w.,  99,  304. 
Beseeched,  pret.  from  beseech, 

304- 
Bestead,  v.  w.,  297. 
Bet,  V.  w.,  297. 
Betide,  v.  7v.,  300,  301. 
Bid,  V.  s.,  266,  275,  280,  284. 
Bid,  pret.  from  bide,  274. 
Bidan,  v.  s.,  268,  275. 
Biddan,  v.  s.,  266,  275. 
Bide,  V.  s.,  v.  w.,  26S,  271,  274, 

275,  280. 
Bind,  V.  w.,  264,  276,  284,  331, 

332. 
Bindan,  v.  s.,  264,  331,  332,  333 
Biscop,  n.,  34. 
Biscop-rice,  n.,  34. 
Bishop,  «.,  34. 
Bishopric,  n.,  34. 
Bitan,  v.  s.,  26S. 
Bite,  V.  s.,  268,  276,  279,  284. 
Black,  ac/j.,  85,  87. 
Black,  «.,  87. 
Black,  V.  w.,  87. 
Blackness,  «.,  85. 
Blandan,  v.  s.  (Gothic),  160. 
Blandan,  v.  s.,  161,  250. 
Blawan,  v.  s.,  263. 
Bledan,  v.  w.,  300. 
Bleed,  v.  w.,  300. 
Blend,  v.  w.,  160,  248,  250,  299. 
Blendan,  v.  w.,  250. 
Bless,  V.  w.,  295. 
Blind,  adj.,  198,  199,  200,  202, 

20.1. 


Bliss  (blisse),  117. 

Blow,  V.  s.,  260,  263. 

Blow,  V.  w.  (v.  s. ),  ('  to  bloom  '), 

24S. 
Blowed,  pret.  from  blow,  v.  s., 

246. 
Boc,  ;/.,  186. 
Boc-hus,  n.,  86. 
Bond,  71.,  159. 
Book,  «.,  1S6,  1S7. 
Book-house,  u.,  86. 
Born,  /.  p.  from  bear,  286. 
Borne,  /.  /.  from  bear,  286. 
Borough,  «.,  187. 
Boughten,  adj.,  261. 
Bounden,  /.  /.  from  bind,  283, 

.2S4. 
Bow,  V.  20.  {v.  s.),  250. 
Brace,  n.,  186. 
Brad,  adj.,  202. 
Braid,  v.  to.  (v.  s.),  248. 
Brake,  pret.  from  break,  280. 
Bran,  n.,  31. 

Break,  e/.  J-.,  266,  2S0,  284. 
Brecan,  v.  s.,  266. 
Brecen,/. /.  fiom  brecan,  279. 
Bredan,  ^'.  ■zf/.,  300. 
Breeches,  n.,  186,  187. 
Breed,  v.  w.,  300. 
Brethren  (brethre,  bretheren), 

n.,  115,  189,  190. 
Brew,  V.  -w.  {v.  s.),  250. 
Brighte,  adv.,  117. 
Bring,  v.  w.,  303. 
Bringan,  jy.  w  ,  303. 
Brisket,  «.,  31. 
Broad,  adj.,  202. 
Broc,  ;z.,  186. 

Brocen,  /.  /.  of  brecan,  279. 
Brogue,  n.,  31. 
Brook,  V.  10.  {v.  s.),  250. 
Brother,  n.,  115,  1S9,  190. 
BroSru,  n.,  115,  189. 
Bu,  num.,  215. 
Build,  t/.  w.,  299. 
Burh,  «.,  187. 


Index  of  Words  and  Phrases.  359 


Burn,  V.  w.y  248,  2S9. 
Burst,  V.  w.  {v.  s.),  248,  297,  298. 
Bursted,  /;rA  from  ^urrst,  298. 
Bursten,/./.  from  l>urs^,  251. 
Buy,  V.  za.,  303. 
-by,  st(0x,  36. 
Bycgan,  v.  zv.,  303. 
Byr,  n.  (Norse),  36. 

Cabin,  ;/.,  31. 

Caer,  jt.  (Celtic),  32. 

Call,  V.  w.,  38. 

Can,  V.  pret.-pres.,  340. 

Carpenter,  «.,  85. 

Carve,  v.  to.  {v.  s.),  120,  248. 

Carven,/./.  from  can'e,  251. 

Casf,  V.  w.,  261,  297,  29S. 

Czsted,  p?rL  from  r^zj/,  298. 

Casten,/. />.  from  r^?.v/',  261.  ■' 

-caster,  suffix^  1 5. 

Catch,  V.  w.,  122,  303,  304. 

Catched,  pret.  from  '^atc/i,  122 

304- 
Ceosan,  z*.  j.,  269. 
Cepan,  v.  w.  293,  302. 
Cernan,  v.  7v.,  99. 
-caster,  suffix,  1 5. 
Cherub,  n.,  193. 
Cherubim,  «.,  193. 
Chest,  ;z.,  99. 
•Chester,  S2iffix,  15. 
Chew,  57.  zy.  (z^.  j.),  250 
Chide,  7'.  J-.,  258,  268,  274,  276, 

279,  284,  300. 
Chided,  pret,  from  chide,  246, 

255- 
Chief,  ad;.,  205. 
Children,  «.,  115,  117,  189,  190. 
Chirche,  «.,  99. 
Chirne,  v.  w.,  99. 
Chode,  pret.   from  6-// /</<?,  274, 

276. 
Choose,  V.  s.,  269,  284. 
Choosed,/;r/.  from  choose,  246. 
Church,  n.,  99. 
Churn,  z^.  ^'.,  99. 


Cidan,  v.  s.,  268. 

Cildru,  «.,  115,  189. 

Cist,  n.,  99. 

Claddc, /;-£-/.  from  clothe,  304. 

Clan,  ;;.,  31. 

ClaSian,  v.  zi> ,  304. 

Cleave,  r-.  w.,  e/.  j.  ('  to-  adhere '), 

249'  253,  254,  26s;  275,  278. 
Cleave,  v.  w.,  v.  s.  ('to  split '), 

250,  252,  254,  269,  284,  302. 
Clepe,  V.  70.,  38. 
Clifan,  V.  s.,  268. 
Climb,  V.  TV.,  V.  s.,    120,   121, 

253,  254,  264,  274,  276,  287. 
Climban,  v.  s.,  264. 
Cling,  V.  s.,  264,  265,  276. 
Clingan,  v.  s.,  264,  265. 
Cliven,  /. /.  from   cleave.  Mo 

adhere,'  278. 
Clomb,  pret.  from  climb,  264, 

274,  276,  287. 
Clothe,  V.  70.,  304. 
Cnawan,  v.  s.,  263. 
-coin,  suffix,  1 5. 
Comand,/./r<?j-.  from  come,  334. 
Come,  V.  s.,  266,  283,  326,  327, 

33-- 
Comed,  pret.  from   come,  24O, 

255- 
Comen,  /.  /.  from  come,  283. 

Con,  V.  70.,  340. 
Consummate,/./.,  306. 
Cook,  ft.,  33. 
Cook,  V.  TV.,  33. 
Cost,  V.  TV.,  297. 
Coude, /r<?^.  of  cait,  340. 
Couple,  n.,  186. 
Couthe,/r^/.  of  can,  340. 
Cow,  n.,  115,  186,  187,  190. 
Crawan,  v.  s.,  263. 
Create,/./.  306. 
Creep,  v.  to.   {v.  s.),   120,   250, 

301. 
Crow,  V.  s.,  V.  -M,,  121,  248,  253, 

263. 
Cu,  ;:.,  1S6. 


360  Index  of  Words  and  Phrases. 


Cue,  ;z.,  33. 

Cucean,  v.  w.,  23- 

Cuma,  V.  s.,  332. 

Cuman,  v.  s.,  266,  279,  332,  339, 

340. 
Curse,  zf.  w.,  295. 
Cut,  V.  7u.,  261,  297. 
Cutten, /./.  of  ait,  261. 
Cy, ;?.,  115,  189. 
Cyng,  n.,  173. 
Cyrice,  n.,  99. 
Cyssan,  v.  w.,  293. 
Cwe3an,  v.  s.,  266. 

D^lan,  V.  w.,  302. 

Dare,  v.  pret.-pres.  and  v.  w., 

340,  341. 
X)2iXQ,  pres.  jd per.  sing:,  341. 
D2LXts,  pres.  ^d per.  sing.,  341. 
Daughter,  n.,  iiy,  189,  190. 
Deal,  V.  w.,  302. 
Dear,  v.  pret.-pres.,  340. 
Deem,  v.  w.,  290,  291,  305,  320, 

321,  323- 
Deepe,  adv.,  iij. 
Deer,  n.,  118,  185. 
Delve,  V.  w.  {v.  s.),  248. 
Deman,  v.  w.,  290,  320,  321. 
Den,  n.,  76,  183. 
Denu,  «.,  169,  176. 
Deor,  71.,  185. 
Derian,  v.  w.,  290. 
Dician,  v.  w.,  256. 
Dig,  z'.  s.  (r/.  •»:;.),  246,  256,  270. 
Digged,  pret.  from   a'/^,    246, 

256. 
Dight,  V.  tv.,  297. 
Ding,  V.  w.  {v.  s.),  248. 
Dip,  V.  iv.,  291;. 
Disjoints,  pres:  2d  per.   sing., 

315- 
Dive,  V.  w.  {v.  s>).  250,  287. 
Do,  V.  irreg.,  85,  v  23,  241,  288, 

327,328,329,330,347. 
Doer,  n.,  8:;. 
Dogma,  «.,  191. 


Dogmata,//,  of  dogma,  191. 

Dohtru,  n  ,  1S9. 

Don,  z/.  zr?v<r.,  241,  347. 

Doth, /r,? J-,  indic.pl.,  318. 

Dought(e)ren,  ?;.,  117,  1S9. 

DoxQ,  pret.  of  ^/z'^,  287. 

Down,  «.,  34. 

Drag,  V.  w.y  249. 

Dragan,  z/.  s.,  267. 

Drave, /r^A  of  c^r/z/^,  276. 

Draw,  V.  s.,  249,  264,  267. 

Dread,  v.  za.  {v.  s.),  248,  292. 

Dream,  n.,  38. 

Dream,  v.  w.,  302. 

Dreman,  v.  za,  302. 

Drifan,  v.  s.,  268. 

Drincan,  v.  s.,  119,  264. 

Drink,  v.  s,,  119,  264,  273,  275, 

284,  285. 
Dunked,  pret.  from  drink,  244, 
Drip,  z/.  z£;.,  118. 
Drive,  v.  s.,  241,  259,  26S,  274, 

276,  279,  283. 
Drive,  pret.  from  drive,   274, 

279. 
Drove,  /.  /.  from  drive,  286. 
Druid,  n.,  31. 
Drunken,/./,  from  drink,  283, 

284. 
Dr\%  z'.  zr^.,  118. 
Drygan,  v.  7a.,  118. 
Drypan,  v.  iv.,  118. 
Dii'n,  ;^,  34. 

Durran,  v.  pret-pres.,  34a 
Dwell,  v.  %v.,  299. 

Eage,  «.,  124. 

Eald,  adj.,  203. 

Ear,  n.,  124,  170,  172,  183. 

Eare,  n  ,  124,  170,  171,  172. 

Eat,  V.  s.,  249,  266,  270,  281 

284. 
Effluvia,  n.,  192. 
Elder,  adj.  compar.,  116. 
Ellipsis,  n.,  191. 
^Kvcifpron.  pers.,  216,  219. 


Index  of  Woi'ds  and  Phrases. 


361 


EngHsc,  adj.^  22. 
Eode,  pret.  of  gdn,  347. 
'E.owtY,  pron.  pers.,  213. 
"KowQX,  pron.  poss.f  222. 
Errata,  n.,  192. 

Estriver,  v.  (Old  French),  255, 
Etan,  z/.  J-.,  266,  279. 
Excellentest,  adj.  siiperL,  204. 
"Exist?,,  pres.  zd per.  sing.,  315. 
Exquisitest,  adj.  sicperl.,  204. 
Eye,  //.,  114,  124,  I  So. 
Eyen   (eyne),  //.   of  eye^    114, 
180,  188. 

Fa,  adj.,  1S9. 
Faire,  adv.,  117. 
Fall,  V.  s.,  263,  283. 
Fame,  n.,  117. 
Fare,  v.  w.  {v.  s.),  249. 
Feallan,  v.  s.,  263. 
Fedan,  v.  w.,  300. 
Feed,  v.  w.,  300. 
Feel,  7/.  7a.,  301. 
Fefor,  ;z.,  34. 
Fela,/r<?«.  iiidef.,  237. 
Eel  an,  z^  iv.,  301. 
YQ\e,pron.  indef.,  237. 
Fell,/./.  of>//,  286. 
Feohtan,  2/.  s.,  264. 
Fight,  z/.  J-.,  264,  276,  284. 
Find,  V.  s.,  264. 
Findan,  v.  s.,  264. 
Fisc,  11.,  157. 
Fish,  n.,  157. 
Fisks,  «.  (Gothic),  157. 
Fix,  V.  w.,  295. 
Fixen,  n.,  99. 
Flaisc-mangere,  ;?.,  86. 
Flang,  pret.  of  _//;/.'',  274. 
Flay,  V.  w.  {v,  s.),  249. 
Flea,  fL,  180. 

FJee,  e/.  ?<:;.  (z/.  j.),  250,  301. 
Fleen,  «.,  iSo. 
Fleogan,  v.  s.,  269. 
Flesh-monger,  ;/.,  86. 
Fling,  z/.  J.,  259,  270,  274. 


Float,  v.  w.  {v.  s.),  250. 

Flon,  n.,  180. 

Flow,  V.  w.  {v.  s.),  24S,  269. 

Flowan,  v.  iv.  {v.  s.),  84,  269. 

Fly,  V.  s.,  264,  269. 

Foe,  n.,  189. 

Fold,  V.  w.  [v.  s.),  24S. 

Folk,  ;/.,  117,  181. 

Followand,  /.  pres.  of  foUoiVy 

334- 
Fon, //.  of  foe,  189. 
Foot,  n.,  118,  162,  163,  1S6,  187, 

188. 
Forlorn,  adj.,  251,  28 1 
Forlose,  v.  s.^  251. 
Formula,  n.,  191. 
Forsake,  v.  s.,  267,  270. 
Forsook,/./,  ixomforsake,  286t 
Fot,  n.,  186,  190. 
Foughten,  /.  /.  iromjight,  283, 

284. 
Fox,  //.,  99. 
Fraught,  v.  zu.,  304. 
Freeze,  v.  s.,  269,  282,  284. 
Freezed, //r/.  oi  freeze ^  255. 
Freight,  ?y.  tx;.,  304. 
F^reosan,  v.  s.,  269. 
Fret,  V.  w.,  249,  270. 
Frore(n),/./.  oi  freeze,  282. 

Ga,  z/.  irreg.,  94. 
Gan,/r^A  of  .j^/;z,  273,  327,  32a 
Gar,  z/.  zc/.,  100. 
Gat,  pi'ct.  of  ^.f/,  280. 
Q.t, prefix,  ^o"]. 
Geld,  z'.  IV.,  299. 
Genius,  ;^.,  192. 
Genus,  n.,  191. 
Geong,  /rf/.  of  gdn,  347. 
Get,  z/.  s.,  266,  280,  284,  338. 
Getan,  v.  s.,  266. 
Gewis(s),  adj.,  345. 
Gifan,  z-.  j".,  266. 
Gild,  V.  w.,  299. 
Gin,  V.  s.,  264,  271,  273,  327 
32S. 


362  Index  of  Words  and  Phrases. 


Ginnan,  v.  j.,  264. 
Gird,  V.  w.,  299. 
Give,  V.  s.,  266,  283. 
Glen,  n.y  31. 

Glide,  V.  w.  [v.  s.),  1 19, 120,  249. 
Glidan,  v.  s.,  119. 
0\\t,  pres.  jd per.  sing.,  319. 
Glitterand,  /.  pres.   of  glitter, 

^334- 

Gnaw,  v.w.  {v.  s.),  120,  249,  255. 
Gm\\n,p.p.  of  gjiazu,  255. 
Go,  V.  irreg.,  299,  326,  334,  347. 
Gonne(n),/r^i'.//.  of  gin,  327. 
Good,  adj.,  205. 
Gooder,  adj.  compar.,  205. 
Goodest,  adj.  compar.,  205. 
Goose,  «.,  118,  186,  1S7. 
Gora,  V.  (Norse),  100. 
Gos,  11.,  186. 
Got,  I  have,  338. 
Grave,  n.,  159. 
Grave,  v.  w.  \v.  j.),  249,  254. 
Greet,  v.  w.,  293. 
Gretan,  v.  w.,  293. 
Grind,  v.  s.,  121,  264,  276. 
Grindan,  v.  s.,  264. 
Gripe,  v.  w.  [v.  s.),  249. 
Grove,  n.,  159. 

Grow,  V.  s.,  121,  260,  263,  326. 
Growan,  v.  s.,  263. 
Growed,/r^/.  of  groiv,  255. 
Gwn,  pret.  pi.  of  gin,  273. 
Gunne(n),/r£'/.//.  of  gin,  273, 
oV- 

}\d,  pron.pers.,  218. 

l[aban,  v.  w.  (Gothic),  241. 

I  laid,  V.  s.,  94. 

Haldan,  v.  s.  (Gothic),  160. 

Ham(e),  «.,  94. 

Hang,  V.  s.  and  v.  w.,  248,  251, 

252,  253,  263,  264,  265. 
Hangan,  v.  s.,  263. 
Hate,  V.  70.,  308,  332. 
\l?iih,  pres.  jd per.  pl.y  318. 
Hatian,  v.  to.,  332. 


Have,  V.  w.,  241,  304,  325,  32^ 

335-      , 
Have  told,  to,  infin.,  333. 
Havede,  pret.  of  have,  304. 
Having  been,  comp.part.,  335. 
Having  been  going,  comp.part.^ 

335-    , 
Having  been  gone,  comp.  part., 

335- 
Yi&,  pron.  pers  ,   129,   214,   215, 

218,  219,  222. 
He,  it  is,  222. 
Healdan,  v.  s.,  i6r,  263. 
Hear,  v.  w.,  290,  301. 
Heat,  V.  w.,  301. 
YltzyQyV.w.fV.s.,  121,249,252, 

267. 
Hebban,  v.  s.,  267. 
Help,  V.  w.,  V.  s.,  120,  121,  248, 

252. 
Helpan,  p.  s.,  162. 
Hem,  pron.  pers.,  115,  216,  219. 
Hemself,  p7'on.  reflex.,  228. 
Heng, /;t/.  of  hang,  265. 
Hex,  pron.  pers.,  219,  221. 
Her,  it  is,  221. 
Were,  pron.  pe7's.,  115,  216,  219, 

225,  226. 
Her'n  (hiren),/rc;?.,  226. 
Heres, /rt?;/.,  224,  225,  226. 
Hers,  pron  ,  224,  225,  226. 
Hes,  pron.  pers.,  97. 
liet,pret.  of  /i.?(7/,  301. 
Hew,  Z'.  w.,  V.  s.,  248,  254. 
Hidden,/./,  of  hide,  255,  257, 

258,  260,  2S4. 
Hide,  V.  s.  {v.  w.),  255,  257,  258, 

260,  270,  284,  301. 
Hight,  v.  w.,  248,  297. 
Yi\m,  pron.  pers.,  129,  214,  215, 

216,  217,  219,  221,  230. 
Him,  it  is,  221. 
Himself, /r*?;?.  reflex.,  227. 
H\mse\\er\,  pron.  reflex.,  227. 
Wn:).,  pron.  pers.,  222. 
Hire,  pron.  J)ers.,  219,  222.  225. 


Index  of  Words  and  Phrases.  363 


Hhen,  pron ,  226. 

Hires, /r<?«.,  224,  225,  226. 

His,  pron.  pers.y  97. 

His, /?-(?«.,  129,  219,  222,  230. 

His  SQ\i,pron.  reflex.,  227. 

His'n  (hisen),/r^;z.,  226. 

"riSx^proii.  pers.,  129,  214,  217, 

218,  219. 
Hit,  V.  w.,  297,  306. 
Hlinian,  v.  w.,  302. 
Hold,  V.  s.,  160,  263,  285. 
Holden,/./.,  from  hold,  285. 
Honorablest,  adj.  stiperl.,  204. 
Horse  (hors),  «.,  117,  169,  174, 

181,  183. 
Hose,  n.,  180. 

Hosen,//.  of  hose,  180,  188. 
How,  adv.,  232. 
Hri8e,  n.,  34. 
Hurt,  V.  w.,  297,  298,  306. 
llnxied,  pret.  of  //z/r/,  298. 
Hwa,/r^;z.  interrog.,  229,  230. 
llwdi,  proH.  indef.,  237. 
\{.-^-&t,  pron.  interrog.,  229,  230, 

232. 
Hwcet5er,  pron,   interrog.,  229, 

230,  232. 
HwilCj/rt"??.  interrog.,  229,  230, 

231. 
Hypothesis,  «.,  191. 
Hyran,  z'.  w.,  290,  302. 

\,  pron.pers.,  129,  213,  217,219. 

I,  it  is,  222. 

\,  prefix,  218,  307. 

\,prep.,  218. 

\z,  pron.  per s.,  213,  217. 

Ice-berg,  ;z.,  34. 

Ich,  pro7i.  pers.,  217. 

I-lent,  /.  /.  from  lettd,  307. 

Ilk,  pron.  demon.,  212. 

In,/r<^.,  133,  218. 

Index,  «.,  192. 

Is,  pron.  pers.,  97. 

Isypres.  sing,  zndp/.,  94,  350. 

Is  being  built,  134. 


Is  being  reaped,  33S. 

Is  building,  134. 

Is  reaped,  337. 

l-s\\orn,p.  p.  of  swear,  307. 

It,  pron.  pers.,    129,  217,   218, 

219,  220. 
It  own,  129. 

Its,  pron.,  129,  130,  220,  230. 
I-wis,  adv.,  345. 

Kalla,  V.  (Norse),  38. 

Keep,  V.  w.,  293,  302. 

Kill,  V.  7a.,  239. 

Kine,  n.,pi.  of  cow,  115,  187. 

King,  n.,  173,  178. 

Kirk,  ;/.,  99. 

Kirn,  v.  w.,  99. 

Kiss,  V.  w.,  293. 

Kist,  n.,  99. 

Knead,  v.  w.  [v.  j.),  249. 

Kneaden, /./.  of  knead,  25I. 

Kneel,  v.  w.,  301,  302. 

Knit,  V.  w.,  297. 

Know,  V.  s.,  260,  263,  283. 

Knowed, /r^/.  of  know,  244. 

Kye,//,  of  cow,  187,  189. 

Kyn,//.  of  cow,  189, 

Lade,  z/.  w.,  v.  s.,  249,  254,  260. 

Laden,  /.  /.  of  /ade,  260. 

Lsedan,  v.  w.,  300. 

Lffifan,  t'.  w; ,  302. 

Lan,  n.  (Celtic),  32. 

Lang,  adj.,  202,  203. 

Laugh,  V.  w.  [v.  s.),  120,  249. 

Lead,  v.  w.,  300. 

Lean,  v.  w.,  302. 

Leap,  V.  w.  {v.  s.),  120,  248,  301, 

302. 
Learn,  v.  w.,  295,  299. 
Learned,  adj.,  292. 
Leave,  v.  w.,  302. 
Lend,  v.  w.,  299,  307. 
Lenger,  adj.  coinpar.,  116. 
Leosan,  v.  w.  [v.  s.),  281. 
Less,  adj.  compar.,  205. 


^64  Index  of  Words  and  Phrases. 


Lesser,  adj.  compar.y  205. 

Let,  V.  w.  {v.  J.),  248,  297,  331. 

Library,  n.,  86. 

Licgan,  v.  s.,  266. 

Lie,  V.  J-.,  266. 

Lie,  V.  w.  [v.  J-.),  250. 

Lift,  V.  w.,  298. 

Lift,/r<f/.  of  ////,  298. 

Light,  V.  w.,  301. 

Lihtan,  v.  w.,  301. 

IJxst.,  p7'es.  ^d  per.  sing:,  319. 

lAt,  pret.  of  light y  301. 

Little,  adj.,  205. 

Littler,  ad/,  com  par.,  205. 

Littlest,  adj.  conipar.,  205 

Lixan,  v.  %v  ,  293. 

Load,  V.  w.,  V.  s.,  249,  255,  260. 

Loaden,/./.  of  load,  255,  260. 

Lock,  V.  w.  [v.  s.),  250. 

Long,  adj.,  116,  202,  203. 

Longer,  adj.  compar.,  116. 

Lorn,  adj.,  251,  281. 

Lose,  V.  w.  {v.  s.),  250,  251,  28 1, 

301,  302. 
Louse,  n.,  187. 
Love,  n.,  117. 
Love,  V.  w.,  239,  290,  305,  311, 

320,  3-1.323,330- 
Low,  V.  w.,  248. 
Lowe,  adj.,  117. 
Lufian,  V.  w.,  290,  311,  320,  321, 

.  .330- 
Lus,  n.,  187. 
Lyhtan,  ?7.  -w.,  301. 

Ma2g,  V.  pret.-pres.,  342. 
Maenan,  e/.  7x/.,  302. 
Magan,  v.  pret.-pres.,  342. 
Make,  e'.  w.,  304. 
Makede,/r^/.  of  wrt/(v,  304. 
Man,  n.,  118,  159,  162,  187. 
Man,  proii.  indef.,  237. 
y[^,pro7t.pers.,  129,  219,  221. 
Me,  it  is,  221. 
}^le,pro7t.  iridcf.,  zyj. 
Me  self, /;-<?;;.  rejlex.,  227. 


Men,  /r<?«.  indef.,  237. 

Mean,  57.  w.,  302. 

Meet,  V.  w.,  300. 

Melt,  z/.  w.  {v.  s.),  248. 

Metan,  v.  w.,  300. 

Mete,  z/.  w.  [v.  s.),  249. 

Methinks,  v.  iv.  impers.,  303. 

Might,  2d  per.  from  wa_y,  342, 

Milk,  V.  w.  {v.  s.),  248. 

Min,  pfon.  pers.  and  /^jj- ,  222, 

Min(e),  /r^;z.,    218,    219,    222, 

223,  224,  226. 
Mix,  V.  w.,  299. 
Mot,  V.  pret.-pres.,  343. 
Motan,  V.  pret.-pres.,  342. 
Mote,  V.  pret.-pres.,  343, 
Molten,/./,  of  melt,  251. 
More,  adv.,  204. 
Most,  rt'^z/.,  204. 
Mount,  n.,  34. 
Mourn,  z/.  iv.  {v.  s ),  248. 
Mouse,  11.,  118,  162,  i°7. 
Mouth,  11.,  124. 
Mow,  e'.  w.,  z'.  J-.,  248,  254. 
Much,  adj.,  205. 
Munt,  ;/.,  34. 
Mils,  n.,  187. 
Must,  V.  pret-pres.,  343. 
Mu3,  ?z.,  124. 

lsl-)\pron.,  218,  219,  223,  224. 
Myselven, /r^i/z.  reflex.,  227. 

Nasu,  «.,  124. 
Nat,  adv.,  94. 
Neat,  n.,  185. 
Neat,  ;z.,  185. 
Need,  v.  w.,  346. 
Nose, ;/.,  124. 

Oasis,  n.,  191. 

Obliged,  to  be,  343. 

Old,  adj.,  116,  201,  202,  203. 

Older,  adj.,  ij6. 

Oleum,  11.  (Latin),  87. 

Omen,  ;/.,  191. 

Omina,//.  of  omen,  191. 


Index  of  Words  and  Phrases.  365 


Or^,frep.,  133. 

Onginnan,  v.  s.,  327. 

Ought,  V.  defec,  343,  344. 

Our,  pro7i.,  219,  222,  223. 

Onre,  pron.,  219,  225. 

Our'n  {our en),  pr OH.,  226. 

Oures,  224,  225,  226. 

Owe,  V.  w.  (v.  pret-pres.),  344. 

Own,  V.  w.,  343. 

Ox  (oxe),  ;/.,  76,  loi,  114,  117, 

170,  171,  172,  176,  180,  183, 

188. 
Oxa,  «.,  170,  171,  172,  176. 

Pain,  ft.,  117. 

Pair,  ;z.,  186. 

Pass,  V.  w.,  299. 

Paven,/./.  of  pave,  261. 

Pay,  V.  w.,  305. 

Pen,  n.  (Celtic),  32. 

Pen,  V.  w.,  295. 

Perfect,  adj.,  205. 

Persuade  myself,  I,  335. 

Persuaded,  I  am,  335. 

Petra,  tt.  (Latin),  87. 

Petroleum,  n.,  87. 

Peyne,  n.,  117. 

Phenomenon,  n.,  192. 

Piece,  n.,  31. 

Plaid,  «.,  31. 

Plead,  V.  w.,  301. 

V\c2id,  pret.  of  plead,  301. 

Pol,  It.  (Celtic),  32. 

Pollute,  p.  p.,  306. 

Proven,/./,  oi prove,  255,  261. 

Put,  V.  w.,  261,  297. 

Putten,/./.  of  put,  261. 

Quake,  v.  w.  in  Anglo-Saxon 
and  Modern  English,  also 
V.  s.  in  Early  English,  120. 

Quay,  «.,  31. 

Quench,  v.  w.  {v.  s.),  248. 

Quit,  V.  w.,  297. 

Quod,  V.  defec,  267. 

Quoth,  V.  defec.,  266,  267. 


Quotha,  ijiterj.,  218. 

Radius,  n.,  192. 

Ra^can,  7/.  ilk,  303. 

Raught, /r^'^".  of  reach.  122,  304 

Reach,  T'.  •cc/.,  122,  303,  304. 

Read,  v.  2a.,  300,  301. 

Reafian,  v.  w.,  302. 

Reap,  V.  w.  {v.  s.),  249. 

Reave,  v.  w.,  302. 

Redan,  v.  w.,  300. 

Reek,  v.  w.  {v.  s.),  250.  * 

Reeve,  ^,  ^.,  259,  270. 

Regol,^';z.,  33. 

Regollic,  adj.,  33. 

Regollice,  adv.,  34. 

Rend,  v.  w.,  299. 

Rid,  V.  w.,  297. 

Ridan,  z/.  s.,  268,  311,  318. 

Ride,  V.  s.,  268,  273,  275,  284, 

311- 
Ring,  V.  s.,  264,  273,  275. 
Ringan,  v.  s.,  264. 
Rinnan,  v.  s.  264. 
Ris,  ^7'eL  of  rw^",  274,  279. 
Risan,  v.  s.,  268. 
Rise,  V.  s.,  268,  274,  276,  2791 

283. 
R\st,  pres.  ^d per.  sing.,  319. 
Rit,  /r^j-.  jflT/^n  si7tg.,  31 1,  319k 
Rive,  V.  w.,  V.  s.,  250,  254. 
Rock-oil,  11.,  Sy. 
Rode,  /.  /.  of  ride,  286. 
Ros,  n.  (Celtic),  32, 
Rose,  p.  p.  of  r/se,  286. 
Rotten,  adj.,  251. 
Row,  V.  w.  [v.  s.),  248. 
Rue,  V.  w.  {v.  s.),  250. 
Run,  V.  s.,  264,  276,  277. 
Rungen,  p.  p.  of  ring,  283. 

Sacan,  v.  s.,  267. 
-sake,  V.  s.,  267,  270. 
Sail,  n.,  186. 
Sal,  V.  pret.-pres.,  94. 
Same, /"rf?;?.  demon.,  213. 


^66  Index  of  Words  and  Phrases. 


Sang,  «.,  94. 

Saw,  V.  w.y  259. 

Sawn./?. /A  oisaiv,  255, 259,  260. 

Say,  V.  u'.,  305,  30S. 

Says  I,  314. 

Scacan,  v.  s.,  267. 

Scathe,  v.  iu.  {v.  s.),  249. 

Sceal,  V.  pret.-pres.,  324,  341. 

Sceap,  11.,  185. 

Sceawian,  z'.  ec,  260. 

Sceoan,  z^  7<7.,  301. 

Sceran,  v.  j.,  266. 

Sceotan,  v.  s.,  269. 

Schal,  V.  pret.-p7'cs.,  273. 

Schoon,  ;z. //.  of  shoe^  180. 

Schulle(n),7'./rr/.-/'r^j-.//.,  273. 

Scinan,  v.  s.,  26S. 

Scip,  w.,  169,  171,  175. 

Scrifan,  v.  j.,  268. 

Scrincan,  v.  j.,  264. 

Score,  n.,  186. 

Sculan,  V.  pret.-pres.,  341. 

Sq,  pron.  demon.,  215,  233. 

Secan,  z^.  z<:;.,  99,  118,  293,  303. 

Seche(n),  v.  w.,  99. 

See,  V.  s.,  266. 

Seed,  preL  of  j^^,  244. 

Seek,  V.  7u.,  99,  118,  293,  303. 

Seethe,  v.  w.,  v.  s.,  250,  252, 

269,  284. 
Seistow,  308. 
Seke(n),  7>.  w.,  99. 
Self,  adj.,  227,  228. 
Sell,  ZJ.  w.,  159,  240,  303. 
Sell  an,  v.  w.,  303. 
Send,  7>.  IV.,  298,  299. 
Sendan,  v.  zu.,  298. 
Seohan,  v.  s.,  266. 
Scon,  V.  s.,  266. 
SeoSan,  r.  s.,  269. 
Seraph,  «.,  193. 
Seraphim,  ;/.,  193 
Set,  V.  w.,  295,  296, 297, 300,  326. 
Settan,  v.  w.,  295. 
Shake,  v.  s.,  267,  283. 
Shaked, /rt'/.  of  shake,  246,  255. 


Shal(l),  V.  tret.-prcs.,  94,  324, 
^  341,  342. 
Shamrock,  n.,  31. 
Shape,  z/.  w.,  v.  s.,  120,  249,  255, 
Share, /;t/.  of  shear,  280. 
Shave,  v.  iv.,  v.  s.,  249,  255. 
'^h.e,  pro7t.  pers.,  215,  216,  219. 
Shear,  v.  w.  and  z/.  s.,  249,  252, 

266,  280. 
Shed,  V.  w.,  297. 
Sheep,  n.,  118,  185. 
Shew,/r^A  of  show,  260,  2S8. 
Shew,  z'.  w.,  see  j/^^za. 
Shme,  z/.  s.,  252,  268,  276,  278, 

285. 
Shined,/r^/.  oi  shine,  246. 
Shinen,/. /.  of  shine,  278,  285. 
Ship,  n.,  169,  175,  183. 
Shoe,  n.,  iSo,  301. 
Shook,  /.  /.  of  shake,  286,  352. 
Shoon,//.  of  j//^^,  180,  188. 
Shoot,  V.  s.,  269,  284,  300. 
Shotten,/.  /.  of  shoot,  269,  284. 
Shove,  V.  w.  (z'.  s.),  250. 
Show,  z/.  zc/.,  259,  288. 
Shown,/./,  of  show,  255,  259, 

260. 
Shred,  v.  w.,  297. 
Shrink,  v.  s.,  264,  275,  284. 
Shrive,  v.  s.  and  v.  w.,  249,  252, 

268,  275. 
Shrunken,  /.  /.  of  shrtnk,  283. 
Shul(en),  v.  pret.-pres.  pi. ,  342. 
Shut,  V.  w.,  297. 
Siche,/r^;z.  demon.,  212. 
Sigh,  V.  w.  {v.  s.),  249. 
Sin,  pron.  poss.,  222. 
Sind(on),  v.  irreg.  pres.  pL,  38, 

348. 
Smg,  V.  s.,  239,   258,   272,   273, 

2/5'  277,  311,  312,320,321, 

322,  T:p. 
Smgan,  v.  s.,  311,  320,  321,  330 
Singende,  /.  pres.,  334. 
Sister,  n.,  117,  189,  190. 
Sistren,//.  of  sister y  117. 


hidex  of  Words  and  Phrasi 


\67 


Sit,  V.  s.,  256,  266,  285,  319. 

Sit,/./,  olsit,  28 5. 

S\t,  pres.  jd per.  sijtg.,  319. 

Sit  tan,  V.  J.,  85,  266. 

Sitten,/./.  oisit,  285. 

Situate,/./.,  306. 

Sl^pan,  V.  s.,  161. 

Slahan,  v.  s.,  267. 

Slank, /r^A  oi  slink,  276. 

Slay,  z^.  J.,  264,  267. 

Slean,  v.  s.,  267. 

Sleep,  z'.  w.   [v.  s.),  120,  160, 

248,  301,  302. 
Slepan,  v.s.  (Gothic),  160. 
Slide,  V.  s.,  258,  268,  274,  276, 

279,  2S4. 
Slidan,  tj.  s.,  268. 
Slincan,  v.  s.,  265. 
Sling,  V.  s.,  265. 
Slingan,  v.  s.,  265. 
Slink,  z>.  s.,  265,  276, 
Slip,  v.  w.  {v.  s.),  249,  250. 
Slit,  V.  w.  [v,  s.),  249,  297. 
Slode,  pret.  of  slide,  274. 
SmTt,/r^/.  of  smite,  274,  279. 
Sniitan,  v.  s.,  268. 
Smite,  V.  s.,  268,  274,  275,  279. 
Smoke,  v.  w.  (v.  s.).,  250. 
Smote,/.  /.  of  smile,  286. 
Sneak,  v.  w.  {v.  s.),  249. 
Snow,  n.,  85. 
Snowy,  adj.,  85. 
"Soche,  pron.  demon.,  212. 
Sod,  pret.  and  /.  /.  of  seethe, 
^  269,  284. 

Sodden,/./,  oi  seethe,  284. 
Solstice,  71..  86. 

Songe(n),/'./.  oi  sing,  277,  283. 
Sovereignest,  t?*^'.  stiperL,  204. 
Sow,  7A  Ty.,  V.  s.,  248,  255. 
Spake, /r^/.  of  speak,  280. 
Span,  z/.  IV.  [v.  s.),  248. 
Span,  pret.  of  j//«,  276. 
Speak,  V.  s.,  266,  280,  284 
Specan,  v.  s.,  266,  279. 
Specen, /. /.  of  specan^  279. 


Spedan,  v.  w.,  300. 

Speed,  z/.  w  ,  300,  301. 

Spell,  V.  w.,  295. 

Spend,  7A  w.,  299. 

Spew,  z/.  zx/.  [v.  s.),  249. 

Spin,  t/.  s.,  265,  276. 

Spinnan,  z^.  s.,  265. 

Spit,  z'.  zc  and  z>.  s.,  256,  270^ 

297. 
Spittan,  V.  w.,  256. 
Split,  V.  w.,  297. 
Spocen,/,/.  oi  specan,  279. 
Spoil,  z'.  z<:;.,  295. 
Sprsedan,  v.  w.,  295. 
Spread,  za  w.,  295,  297,  300. 
Spring,  V.  s.,  273,  275. 
Springan,  v.s.,  265,  275. 
Spronge,/. /.  of  spri7ig,  283. 
Sprout,  z/.  ze;  (z/.  j.),  250. 
Sprungen,  /.  /.  of  spring,  2S3. 
Spurn,  V.  w.  {v.  s.),  248. 
Squeeze,  v.  za.,  288. 
Squoze,/r<;'/.  of  squeeze,  28S. 
Staff,  71.,  258. 
Stale,  /r<?/.  of  steal,  280. 
Stamen,  ;z.,  192. 
Stamina,//,  oi  stamen,  192. 
Stan,  n.,  169,  171,  174,  181. 
Stand,  V.  s.,  243,  267,  285. 
Standan,  v.  s.,  243,  267. 
Stant, /r<?j.  jf//^r.  J"/';/^.,  319. 
Start,  V.  w.,  296. 
Starve,  z/.  w.  {v.  s.),  120,  248. 
Stave,  n.,  258. 
Stave,  z^.  w.  and  z'.  j.,  253,  258, 

270. 
Stead,  V.  w.,  297. 
Steal,  V.  s.,  266,  280,  284. 
Stelan,  v.  s.,  266. 
Step,  V.  w.  [v.  s.),  249. 
Stick,  V.  s.  [v.  w.),  121,  257,  270k 
Stiken,  v.  s.,  257. 
Stincan,  v.  s.,  265. 
Sting,  V.  s.,  265,  276. 
Stingan,  v.  s.,  265. 
Stink,  V.S.,  265,  275. 


$6S  Index  of  Words  and  Phrases. 


Stint,  V.  w.  {v.  s.),  248. 
Stonden,/./.  oistaiid,  285,  352. 
Stone   (ston),  «.,   ■](^,   88,    169, 

182,  183. 
Stool,  ;z.,  76. 
Strang,  adj.,  202,  203. 
Straught,  pret,  of  stretch,  304. 
Streavvian,  t/.  w.,  260. 
Streak,  v.  w.  [v.  s.),  249. 
Strecoan,  v.  w.,  304. 
Street,  n.,  15. 
Strenge,  «.,  2 58. 
Strenger,  adj.  compar.,  1 1 6. 
Stretch,  v.  w.,  304. 
Strew,  V.  w.,  259. 
Strewn,/./,  oi  strew,  255,259, 

260. 
Strican,  v.  s.,  268. 
Stricken,  /.  /.  of  strike,  268, 

269,  287. 
Strid,  pret.  of  stride,  274. 
Stride,  v.  s.,  268,  274,  276. 
Stridan,  v.  s.,  268. 
Strike,  v.  s.,  265,  268,  287. 
String,  n.,  258, 
String,  ^z.  s.,  258,  270. 
Stringed,  ^^■.,  258. 
Strive,  v.  s.  and  v.  w.,  246,  253, 

259,  270. 
Strong,  adj.,  116,  202,  203. 
Stronger,  adj.  compar.,  116. 
Strove,  /.  /.  of  strive,  286. 
Strow  and  strown.     See  strew 

and  strewn. 
Strucken,  /.  /.  of  strike,  287. 
Suchj/r^w.  demon.,  213,  231. 
Suck  z'.  w.  {v.  s.)   250. 
SulcKe, /rc^z.  de7non.,  212. 
Sunge(n),/./.  of  j/w^,  261,  283. 
Sunn3n-stede,  n.,  86. 
Sunstead,  n.,  86. 
Sup,  57.  w.  {v.  s.),  250. 
Supreme,  adj.,  205. 
Sustren,  71.pl.,  189 
Swallow,  z/.  w.  (z^.  J.),  248. 
Swang,/rifA  of  swing,  274,  276. 


Sware, /r^/.  of  Jzt'^(3;r,  280,  281 
Swear,  v.  s.,  257,  267,  2S0,  281. 
Sweat,  V.  w.,  297. 
Sweep,  V.  w.,  248,  301,  302. 
Swell,  V.W.,  V.  s.,  120,  24S,  255. 
Sweostru,  7t.  p/.,  189. 
Swearian,  v.  s.,  267. 
Swiche, /ro«.  devio7i.,  2T2. 
Swilc, /n';/.  demo7z.,  212. 
Swilche, /?'(?;/.  de7noii.,  212. 
Swim,  ^'.  j.,  265,  275. 
Swimman,  ^.  j-.,  265. 
Swin,  11.,  185. 
Swine,  ;^.,  185. 

Swing,  -d.  s.,  258,  265,  274,  276. 
Swingan,  v.  s.,  265. 
Swink,  v.  w.  {v.  s.),  248. 
Swulche,  pron.  demo7t.,  212. 

Tacan,  v.  J.,  267,  320. 
T^can,  V.  w.,  303. 
Take,  v.  s.,  267,  283,  320,  321. 
Tare,  pret.  of  /<r^r,  280. 
Teach,  v.  w.,  122,  241,  303,  30^* 
Teached,  pret.  oi  teach,  122. 
Tear,  v.  s.,  159,  257,  266,  280^ 

283. 
Tell,  V.  w.,  zi,  75'  "S,  122, 303, 

304- 
Tellan,  v.  w.,  118,  303. 
Telled,/r^A  of  tell,  122,  304. 
Teran,  v.  s.,  266. 
Than,  co7ij.,  236. 
Thank,  v.  w.,  291,  292. 
Thas,  pro7i.  demon.,  209. 
That,  pro7i.  demo7i.,   208,  2OQ1 

210. 
That,  proju  rel.,  233,  234,  235. 
That,  art.,  210,  211. 
That  oon,  210, 
That  other,  210. 
The,  art.,  129,  209,  210. 
The,  adv.,  209. 
The  own,  129. 
Thee,  pro7i.  pers.,  219,  221. 
Their, /rc?«.,  115,  219,  225,  226- 


Index  of  Words  ajtd  Phrases.  369 


'Tht\x\\,  pron.,  226. 

Ihtm,  pron.  pers.,  97,  115,  216, 

217,219,221. 
Themsielf,  pro}i.  reflex.,  228. 
Then,  art.,  210. 
Thereof,  adv.,  129. 
Th&se,  pron.  demon.,  211. 
l^hey,  p}'07t.  pers.,  115,  215,  216. 
Thilke,/r^;z.  demon.,  212. 
Thine, /r^«.,  218,  219,  224,  226. 
Thing,  n.,  115,  117,   118,    181, 

185. 
Think,  v.  w.,  303,  308  313,  314. 
Thinkestow,  308. 
Thinks  I,  314. 
This,  pron.  demo.t.,  208,   211, 

212. 
Th.0,  pr 071.  demon.,  209. 
-thorp,  suffix,  36. 
Those  {thos), pro7t.  demon.,  209. 
T\\ovi,pro7i.  pers.,  213,  219,  229. 
Thresh,  v.  zu.  [v.  s.),  248. 
Thrive,  v.  s.  and  v.  w.,  1 20, 1 59, 

246,  253,  259,  268,  276. 
Throssen,/. /.  of  thrust,  261. 
Throw,  V.  s.,  263. 
Thrust,  V.  w.,  261,  297. 
Thrusten,  /.  /.  of  thrust,  261. 
-thwaite,  siffix,  36. 
T\\y,pron.,  218,  219,  223,  224. 
Tidian,  v.  w.,  300. 
Til,jV^>,94. 
To,/r^/.,  94,  333. 
To, /r^/,,  333. 
Toe,  «.,  117,  180. 
-toft,  suffix,  36. 
Toft,  ;/.  (Norse),  36. 
Ton,//,  of  toe,  iiy,  180. 
Tone,  the,  210. 

Tongue,  n.  124,  170,  172,  183. 
Took,  /.  /.  of  take,  286. 
Tooth,  n.,  124,  186,  187. 
-torp,  suffix,  36. 
Tos,  n.  124,  186. 
T'other,  211. 
T'-ther,  the,  210. 


Trade, /rcA  of  tread,  280. 

Tre,  n.  (Celtic),  32 

Tread,  v.  s.,  266,  279,  280,  284. 

Tredan,  v.  s.,  266,  279. 

Tree-wright,  w,,  85. 

Treow-wyrhta,  n.,  85. 

Trouthe,  n.,  117. 

Truth,  n.,  117. 

Tu,  num.,  215. 

Tunge,  «.,  124,  170,  171,  172. 

Tuon,  V.  (old  High  German), 

241. 
Turf,  n.,  1S7. 
Twa,  nzivi.,  215. 
Twit,  V.  w.  {v.  s.),  249. 

I^a,  /r(7«.  demon.,  209. 
|)e,  pron.  demon.,  208. 
pe,  /r^;/.  r^/.,  233. 
]7e,  instrtimental  case  of  J<?,  209. 
pen, /r<3;^.  demon.  a.nd  art.,  210. 
pencan,  i7.  w.,  303. 
\>es,pro7i.  demon.,  209,  211. 
\>\\\  pron.  pers.  and  poss.,  213, 

222. 
]7one, /r^;z.  demon.,  208,  210. 
porp,  ;z.  (Norse),  36. 
prawan,  v.  s.,  263. 
]7rifan,  v.  s.,  268. 
fjveiti,  7^.  (Norse),  36. 
■pylc, /r^;z.  demon.,  212. 
]7yslic, /r^;^.  demott.,  212. 
I^yncan,  z/.  w.,  303. 
py,  instrumental  case  of  J"^,  209. 

Uncouth,  «^*.,  340. 

Understand,  v.  s.,  243,  352. 

Unwitting,  adj.,  345. 

\}xt,  pron.  poss.,  222. 

\^s,  pron.  pers.,  219,  221. 

\5 sex,  pron.  pers.  ^xidposs.,  213, 

222. 
Utan,  z/.  {subjunctive),  331. 

Virtuoso,  ;z.,  192. 
Virtuousest,  a^'.,  204. 


370  htdex  of  Words  and  Phrases. 


Vixen,  //.,  99. 
Vortex,  «.,  192. 
Vox,  «.,  99. 

Wacan,  7.  j.,  267. 
Wade,  V.  s.  {v.  -w),  249. 
Wake,  V.  s.,  246,  253,  254,  267, 

2S5. 
Waken, /.j?J.  of  wake^  285. 
Walk,  z*.  7^;.  {v.  s.),  24S. 
'^zrt,  prct.  of  7e;^^r,  257,  280. 
Warp,  7/.  w.  [v.  s.),  248. 
Was, /r^/.  of  be,  159,  350. 
Was  given  a  book,  338. 
Was  told  the  truth,  2,3^. 
Wash,  V.  w.  [v.  s.),  120,  249. 
Washen,/./.  of  ruask,  251. 
V^ciStffi'et.  2d  per.  sing.,  349. 
W^at,  V.  pret.-pres.,  344, 
W3.\Q,pret.  of  weave,  280. 
Wax,  7/.  Tf;.  (t'.  j.),  120,  249,  255. 
Waxen,/./,  of  wax,  255. 
Wear,   t^.  j.  {v.  w.),   121,   257, 

270,  280. 
Weave,  v.  s.,  v.  w.,  249,  253, 

266,  280,  284. 
Wed,  V.  w.,  298. 
Weep,  V.  w.   [v.  s.),  120,  248, 

301,  302. 
Weet,  v.  piet.-pres.,  344. 
Wefan.^  v.  s.,  266. 
Well,  V.  w.  {v.  s.),  248. 
Wend,  V.  w.,  299,  347. 
Wendan,  v.  w.,  347. 
Wenden,  v.  w.,  347. 
Went,  pret.   of  k/^"/?^  and  go, 

299.  347- 
Went,  /^./.  of  wefid,  347. 
WeorSar,  7/.  s.,  132,  336. 
Were,  pret  2d  per.  shtg.,  349. 
Werian,  7/.  t^/.,  257. 
Wen,  pret.  2d  per.  sing.,  350. 
Wesan,  v.  s.,  132,  336,  337,  349, 

350. 
Wet,  V.  «'.,  292,  297. 


What,  pron.  interrog.^  229,  230^ 

231,  236. 
Whet,  V.  w.,  297. 
Whether, /rc«.  interrog.,  232. 
Which,  pro7i.    interrog.,    231, 

232. 
Which, /r^«.  rcL,  234,  235,  236 
Which  that,  234. 
Which,  the,  234. 
Whilk,/r^«.,  231. 
Whilom,  adv.,  177. 
Whiskey,  n.,  31. 
Who,  projt.  interrog.,  77,   128, 

129,  214,  229,  230,  231. 
Who,  pro7z.  rel.,  23^,  236. 
Who,  pron.  itidef.,  237. 
Whom,   pron.    interrog.,     129, 

230,  231. 
Whom, /;-<?;?.  rel.,  235,  236. 
Whom,  than,  236. 
Whoop,  V.  w.  (v.  s.),  248. 
Whose,  pro7i.  interrog.,  23Q/ 
Whose, /r^«.  rel.,  235,  236. 
Whulk,/r^;z.,  231. 
Why,  adv.,  232. 
W\eh,  pron.,  231. 
Wield,  V.  w.  {v.  s.),  120. 
Wif,  n.,  124. 
Wife,  «.,  124. 
Will  (wil,  wille),  v.  pref.-pres.^ 

324,  346. 
Willan,  V.  pret.-pres.,  345,  346. 
Win,  V.  s.,  265,  276,  277,  278. 
Wind,  V.  s.,  V.  w.,  24S,  253,  265, 

276. 
Windan,  v.  s.,  265. 
W^innan,  v.  s.,  265. 
Wipe,  V.  w.  [v.  s.),  249. 
Wis,  v.,  345. 
Wiss,  V.  w.,  345. 
Wissian,  v.  7v.,  345. 
Wist,  p7'et.  of  wot,  344,  345. 
Wiste,/r^/.  of  wdt,  344,  345. 
W\t,  profi.  pers.,  213,  215. 
Witan,  7'.  pret.-pres.,  344. 
Wite,  7/.,  249. 


Index  of  Words  and  Phrases. 


371 


Withdraw,  v.  s.,  85, 

Withhold,  V.  s.,  85. 

Withstand,  v.  s.,  85,  243. 

'Witting,  p.  pres.  of  wot,  345. 

Wol,  z'.  pret.-fres.,  346. 

Wonnen, /. /.  of  win,  277. 

Wont,  V.  w.,  297. 

Won't  (wonot),  346. 

Work,  V.  w  ,  303. 

Worse,  adj.  co77ipar.,  205. 

Worser,  adj.  compar.,  205. 

Worth(en),  v.  s.,  132,  336,  -^y]. 

Wot,  V.  pret.-pres.,  344,  345. 

Woteth,  pres.jdper.  sing.,  345. 

Wotting, /./r^j.  of  wot,  345. 

Wrang, /r^^".  of  wring,  274. 

Wreak,  z/.  z£;.  (v.  s.),  249. 

Wreathe,  z/.  w.  {v.  s.),  249. 

Wreathen,/./.  of  wreathe,  251. 

Wring,  t/.  s.,  265,  274,  276. 

Wringan,  v.  s.,  265. 

Wringed, /r^/.  of  wring,  255. 

Writ,/r^A  of  ivrite,  274. 

Writan,  z'.  j  ,  26S. 
\  Write,  V.  s.,  26S,  271,  273,  274, 
\     275,284. 

Writhe,  v.  w.  {v.  s.),  249. 

Writhen,/./.  of  writhe,  251. 

Wrote,  /.  p.  of  writey  286. 


Wrought, /r^^*.  of  ry^r^,  303. 
Wuch, /r^«.,  231. 
Wyle,  V.  pret.-pres.,  324. 
Wyrcan,  v.  w.,  307. 

Y,  prefix,  307. 

Yawn,  z/.  w.  [v.  s.),  249,  251. 

Y-he,p.p.  of  ^^d-,  307. 

Yq,  pron.pers..  128,  129,  219, 

220,  221,  229. 
Year,  n.,  115,  117,  181. 
Yell,  V.  w.  (v.  s.),  248. 
Yelp,  V.  w.  [v.  s.),  248. 
Y-go,p.p.  oi  go,  307. 
Yield,  V.  w.  [v.  s.),  248. 
Y-maked, /. /.  of  make,  307. 
Yode.,  pret.  of  ^^^,  347. 
Y olden, p.p.  of  jf/>/</,  251. 
Y on,  pron.  demon.,  213. 
Yovi,  pron.  pers.,  128,  129,  219^ 

220,  221,  229. 
Yo\xx,  pron. pers.  and/^jj-.,  219, 

Youre, /rf;2.,  219,  225. 
Your'n  (youren), />r<?7z.,  226. 
Yours  (youres),/r^«.,  224,  225 

226. 
Y-sunge,/./.  of  sing,  261. 
Y'Wis,  adv.y  345. 


FOURTEEN  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 


c 
c 


This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 

Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


'   ^^r>,^r^f 


'm^-^f^^ 


JUN  5    1956  L  tr 


X--~}4.^v~- 


i9NQv^58/ 


jA^     » 


:9 


YB  01565 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


^»^^,r-*' 


